Members of the legal fraternity are outraged by the raids on a number of legal premises by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in search of documents related to the forthcoming trial of Jacob Zuma, the former deputy president.

They told The Sunday Independent the raids had "dangerous and far-reaching" implications for client confidentiality and needed testing in the country's highest court, the constitutional court.

The raids were conducted under sweeping laws governing the National Prosecuting Authority Act of 1998 allowing the investigating director or any person authorised to do so to enter premises without notice in which "anything connected with that investigation is or is suspected to be".

In certain circumstances, section 29 of the same law allows for premises to be entered without a court order.

One senior counsel asked: "How can they seize privileged material from someone's attorney? I am dying to have sight of the terms of the order allowing the raids that was given by Transvaal Judge President Bernard Ngoepe."

Another issue that might well have to be tested, he said, was whether the judge president of the Transvaal had jurisdiction over other provinces.

Among those condemning the raids on legal offices are the Law Society of South Africa and the General Council of the Bar, which have called for everything seized to be returned.

The nationwide dawn swoop on Thursday targeted the homes and offices of Zuma, his legal advisers and various associates.

The raids may have been aimed at laying the basis for further charges to be laid.

While the NPA is remaining tightlipped about its strategy, the immediate purpose of the raids appears to have been to secure evidence to bolster the state's corruption case against Zuma and explore information that surfaced in the course of the marathon trial of Schabir Shaik, Zuma's former financial adviser.

Investigators are understood also to be checking avenues that extend from whether the former deputy president made false declarations in the executive and parliamentary members' interest registers on the nature of his links with several generous benefactors named during the trial.

The premises of several of these affluent benefactors were raided by the Scorpions this week.

William Booth, the chairperson of the Law Society of South Africa's criminal law committee, said this week's blanket seizure of documents from legal firms by the Scorpions was in his view "a step too far" and needed to be "robustly" challenged.

"The overriding concern is that material seized could be of a privileged nature, which in itself is a serious breach of confidentiality," he said.

"It is easy to say that all privileged documents will be stored and sealed until a decision is made on admissibility. But the fundamental questions here are who decides what is or isn't privileged, and who sees this material first before it is stored and sealed by the registrar of the high court?"

Booth, who is also a counsellor and a member of the criminal law committee of the Cape Law Society, said it was "an alarming thought" that information given in confidence to attorneys by clients, including witnesses' information about other cases and other legal practitioners, could now be viewed by unknown persons.

Saber Jazbhay, a Durban-based lawyer and member of the Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights Committee, said there were "many question marks" hanging over the Scorpions' actions on Thursday.

"As far as I am aware the NPA, under which the Scorpions fall, must follow strict guidelines set down by the court. We need to know that this was done. We need to see the founding affidavit.

"I would say that by not giving lawyers an opportunity to address the matter before the raids took place, it is a serious breech of our constitution.

"It also can be argued that privileged information which invades the areas of confidentiality between client and practitioner may not be admissible in court."

Robin Palmer, the professor of law at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, said that section 29 of the National Prosecuting Authority Act was used as the basis for the countrywide raids.

"This allowed the Scorpions to seize and search with wide-ranging powers. It is a relatively new act and is yet to be adequately tested before the constitutional court."

With acknowledgements to Liz Clarke, Jeremy Gordin, Chiara Carter and the Sunday Independent.