African National Congress (ANC) president Jacob Zuma’s legal team has telephone taps ­ allegedly gathered by state intelligence agencies ­ of conversations between a host of prominent South Africans discussing, among other things, the Zuma case.

They include conversations between former president Thabo Mbeki and former Scorpions head Leonard McCarthy, according to people who were monitored.

The recorded conversations include a host of other prominent players in the Zuma drama, many now involved in one way or another with ANC rival the Congress of the People, including the former head of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), Bulelani Ngcuka, and businessmen Saki Macozoma and Mzi Khumalo.

It is not yet clear precisely what the tapes contain, although the mere fact that Mbeki was discussing matters with McCarthy could be considered a boost to Zuma’s claim that there was interference in his corruption case by a political rival.

They apparently include the period just before and after the ANC’s elective conference at Polokwane in 2007.

Some of the people monitored are furious, first that they were monitored by state intelligence agencies, and second that these tapes are now in the hands of private citizens.

It is understood they have consulted lawyers about the matter.

The existence of the tapes suggests that state intelligence agencies were tapping the phone calls of a sitting president. Although authorised telephone tapping is legal ­ ironically in terms of a law passed during Mbeki’s term of office ­ it is in normal circumstances supposed to be judicially authorised and founded on a legitimate crime-fighting motive.

Ngcuka said yesterday that on the face of it, the interception and monitoring as well as the possession of such material by private individuals is illegal.

“It is a matter of grave concern that in a democratic state ­ which has an entrenched Bill of Rights, which among others, safeguards the rights of the citizens to privacy ­ you could have surveillance by a state agency and the product of that surveillance be made available to the lawyers of an accused person in a criminal trial,” he said.

Zuma’s lawyer, Michael Hulley, did not return calls or respond to e-mails requesting comment yesterday. NPA spokesman Tlali Tlali said the organisation would not comment on details of information passed on in the process of deciding whether to drop the corruption charges against Zuma.

“The process needs time to be concluded, and until it is complete we intend to maintain its confidential status,” he said.

The NPA said last week it had “recently been supplied with additional information by Zuma’s lawyers which has necessitated further investigation, verification and careful consideration”. This consideration has been taking place over the past week, and it was during this process that many of the people involved became aware that telephone taps of their conversations were in the hands of Zuma’s legal team.

According to people familiar with the matter, in presenting new information of political interference to NPA head Mokotedi Mpshe, the Zuma legal team presented both written and oral submissions.

Press reports this week have suggested that this new information passed on to the Scorpions unequivocally demonstrated political interference in the Zuma case and in the 1999 arms deal. It included damning new evidence about Mbeki’s alleged involvement in awarding the contracts for the new defence equipment.

It also includes submissions on the Scorpions’ controversial Special Browse Mole report, which raised concerns about funding and support for Zuma from Libya and Angola, as well as the possibility of violent resistance to Zuma’s prosecution.

But news of actual telephone taps between Mbeki and McCarthy, among others, discussing the Zuma case, takes the potential quality of the information to a new level. It also raises questions about how the information was obtained.

Ngcuka denied that the taps could have contained information that would show the objective was to manipulate the NPA or use it as a tool to frustrate Zuma’s presidential ambition by prosecuting him.

“I am confident that if any authentic record of my conversations with whomsoever is produced, no evidence would be found that would implicate me in such a conspiracy,” he said.

“It is a matter of public record that when I, in my capacity as NDPP, had the opportunity to prosecute Zuma, I declined to do so.

“Should such allegations be repeated in a court of law or other legal forum, I am confident that no wrongdoing will be found against me. Indeed, I stand ready to refute and expose them as false, malicious and defamatory,” he said.

With acknowledgements to Tim Cohen and Business Day.