The trial of Schabir Shaik had not yielded enough evidence to prosecute Jacob Zuma, the state contended in the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein on Tuesday. "A more comprehensive investigation was called for," said Wim Trengove, counsel for the state.

He submitted that although Zuma's former financial adviser had been found to have given him money with corrupt intent, this did not mean that the former deputy president had received the payments with the same intent. "It's thus wrong to say there was enough evidence." Hence it had been necessary for the Scorpions to raid four of Zuma's homes and his attorney Michael Hulley's office and seize about 93 000 documents, as they did on August 18 2005.

The Durban High Court subsequently declared five of the search warrants unlawful and ordered the documents to be returned. Trengove was responding to contentions made by Zuma's lawyers that having enough evidence to convict Shaik was enough "prima facie" evidence to convict Zuma. He disputed that the intention behind the seizure of financial records at Hulley's office was to get behind Zuma's defence strategy in his pending corruption trial.

He said this had been based on a misunderstanding of a statement made by Scorpions investigator Johan du Plooy in an affidavit. "What he said was that as the case unfolded defences are suggested from time to time, which the state needs to investigate to determine whether they have substance," said Trengove.

He asked the court not to decide "effective and appropriate relief" in the matter on conventional lines, but to consider a remedy that brings in constitutional interests and the public interest. "In a case such as this one there are other interest that are at stake, constitutional interests." Trengove asked the court for an order to keep the seized evidence sealed and locked in case Zuma is in fact prosecuted for corruption.

Arguing against the appeal, Zuma's counsel, Kemp J Kemp, submitted that the warrants under contention were too wide in scope. Kemp also submitted that there was no way to determine when the searchers were acting outside the scope of the warrants. "A person in charge of a property must know what to resist."

Zuma was whisked from the court when it adjourned for lunch. From his black 4x4, he waved to a group of singing supporters in front of the court steps. Before the start of proceedings, a security guard joked with journalists sitting in the public gallery, telling them how to behave. "No cameras and no zooming in on Mr Zuma." Security guards with ear pieces milled around the room finding a seat for Zuma.

He eventually took his place next to Hulley, and one row behind Kemp. Trengove greeted Zuma and shook his hand. A court official who came to watch proceedings said she had never seen the court so full "even for [Allan] Boesak's case".

The outcome of the appeal would determine whether or not the National Prosecuting Authority will charge Zuma and French arms company Thint for corruption relating to the multibillion-rand arms deal. The case continues. -- Sapa

With acknowledgements to Sapa and Mail and Guardian.