By Dries Liebenberg

Pierre Moynot was Thales SA's Director from 1996 to 1998, and was succeeded by Alain Thetard, who served in the same position until 2002. They are both implicated in an alleged criminal enterprise with Zuma and his former financial advisor, Schabir Shaik. The accused are asking the court to make an order about the infringement of their rights, leaving it to the state to withdraw charges. Dries Liebenberg

Advocate Barry Roux has argued that without Alain Thetard and Pierre Moynot, Thales SA will be unable to call any witnesses to gainsay the state's evidence of corruption, racketeering and money laundering.

“Should we not wait till trial to argue that? We say My Lord, what is it I'mgoing to say in trial: Stand up in the beginning and say we don't have any witnesses on all 783... We don’t have witnesses. And the court will say, well we will determine at the end of the day the relevance of that.  And I can tell you now (that) what the relevance is: I cannot call anyone. I do not have anyone, whatever the witness is going to say if its true or not true,” Roux said.

In their own application for a similar order, Advocate Dali Mpofu told the court that Thetard would have been able to shed light on a fax allegedly documenting an agreement in 2 000 to pay Zuma a bribe.

“He says: ja, ja, ja. The encrypted fax that was me. And it was about a bribe. The we have to cross-examine him to say, OK where did you meet? Was Mister Zuma there? And so on and so forth. What was the code. We have alright to do that, a constitutional right. That right is being denied to us by the death of Mister Thetard. It's as simple as that,” Mpofu said.

Another member of Zuma's legal team, Advocate Nqaba Buthelezi, has further argued that the racketeering charge against him and Thales makes it impossible for the state to separate the two accused as it depends on a criminal enterprise. He says there's a number of instances where they need to test evidence given in the 2004 corruption trial of Zuma's financial advisor, Schabir Shaik.

“Now if you read the Squires judgement, we have counted up to 50, if not more, versions, propositions and issues that we need to dispute through viva voce evidence. Not on what the State wants to do and say: we want to import documents that were admitted in the Shaik trial, admitted here as hearsay evidence,” Buthelezi said.

The state is opposing the applications. Prosecutor, Advocate Andrew Breytenbach, has argued that the trial should proceed and that the court make a ruling at the end as to what extent Tahles and Zuma's right to a fair trial had been infringed upon. He has told the court there are other witnesses the defence can consult or testify about the charges. He also pointed out that the state has given its undertaking that they won't object to evidence from the Shaik trial, which has a bearing on this case, be admitted as hearsay evidence.

“The state has consented on the record, pre-emptively, to their admission. So they will be admitted and obviously the parties will lead evidence to the truth of the contents of those documents. And at the end of the day you will hear argument on the weight and probative value of them. And you will judge that and give your reasons for your judgment at the end of the case,” Breytenbach said.

Mpofu has indicated that Zuma will petition the Supreme Court of Appeal for leave to appeal the dismissal of their application to have lead prosecutor, Advocate Billy Downer, removed due to alleged bias. Judge Nkosinathi Chili has denied them leave to appeal. The judge has adjourned the case to the 3rd of June, while reserving judgement on Thales and Zuma's applications.

---SABC---