This was revealed Tuesday during Shaik's second day in the witness box at the Durban High Court.

Shaik told the court he continued to make payments to Zuma even after the state's search and seizure operation in 2001 and "[I] continue to do so to this day".

He said after the state started its investigation he continued to pay Zuma's children's education fees and contributed financially to the family.

New to the public gallery yesterday was Shaik's wife, Zuleka, who was for the first time since the start of the trial exposed to the proceedings and the media frenzy.

Seated next to his brother Mo, Zuleka listened attentively as her husband told the court that Zuma was so deep in debt that former president Nelson Mandela "wanted to assist him financially to get back on his feet".

According to Shaik, Mandela feared that Zuma's financial situation would affect his African National Congress duties.

Shaik told the court that at one stage, Zuma planned to retire from politics so as to provide for his "sizeable family".

Apparently Shaik stepped in, advised his friend not to retire and started to support him financially.

Judge Hillary Squires yesterday raised an eyebrow and asked: "You never suggested to him to reduce his standard of living?"

Shaik replied that at the time of his first payment, the bulk of Zuma's R12 000 salary went towards the upkeep of his house, wives and children.

He told the court Zuma was not a man for "Cartier watches, Armani perfume or Hugo Boss suits", and that the children's education was a growing debt.

"I found myself helping a friend with a sizeable family which brought him joy in his life," Shaik explained.

Shaik went on to provide further details on the various payments he made to or on behalf of Zuma, including clothes, car repayments, school fees and other debts.

Squires enquired what was wrong with the government-provided vehicle that Zuma had to have a Mercedes Benz.

When Shaik replied that the government provided Zuma with a travel allowance, Squires quickly remarked: "Then why couldn't he pay for his own Mercedes Benz?"

Squires seemed surprised with Shaik's explanation that there was too much red tape for the government to pay for the car and asked: "Even for a minister or the deputy president?"

Shaik said yes.

He also said that he recorded two types of loans to Zuma - one personal and the other as contributions to the ANC.

He testified that he made several payments on Zuma's behalf to the ANC and even paid for a jet to transport Zuma to a party meeting in Johannesburg and then to a Cabinet meeting in Pietermaritzburg.

When asked by Squires why the ANC did not meet the bill, Shaik said he did not think the ANC actually had the funds to spare.

Later Shaik said he waits "for the day the ANC does become cash flush, my lord, so they have to be in such a precarious position".

Shaik told the court that he did not expect Zuma to repay him for his contributions to the ANC which were made on his behalf. In fact, he did not expect Zuma to repay him at all.

"I thought he'd find it in his heart to pay me. If not, it also doesn't matter," he said.

He said when Zuma called him to King House in 1999 to sign a revolving loan agreement, he did not see the importance of such a document.

"To this day I do not see the importance of this acknowledgment between the deputy president and I," Shaik said.

He said Zuma was in possession of the original contract as he had to "furnish that to Parliament".

However, last year a copy was faxed to Shaik and another hand delivered.

Although the copy was handed in yesterday, the state made it clear that they "want to see the real one".

Shaik said parliamentarians are required to declare "such things" annually.

He told the court that as Zuma's economic advisor, a title that he did not want *1 but Zuma insisted on, he would have to furnish the deputy president's secretariat with information annually.

Shaik told the court he only knew of "what the deputy president told me". He said he was not aware of other parties, such as Durban businessman Vivian Reddy, making payments on Zuma's behalf.

When asked by defence advocate Francois van Zyl if he made payments to Zuma in return for his influence, Shaik loudly replied, "Absolutely not, my lord."

The trial continues today.

With ackowledgements to Nivashni Nair and The Natal Witness.

*1  Not according to the published Nkobi marketing information. This was a fact of which to be mighty proud.

Another slip of consistency.