Shaik faces R34m+ bill
2006-02-01 22:50
Johannesburg - Schabir Shaik might owe the state even more than R34m if his appeal against Tuesday's asset forfeiture order fails.
From Tuesday, 15.5% annual interest will be levied according to law on the R34.3m Judge Hilary Squires awarded to the state.
Judge Squires ruled that Shaik's corrupt relationship with fired deputy president Jacob Zuma was worth that amount.
These assets followed from Shaik's use of Zuma's name to obtain contracts, and Zuma's invervention to get Shaik to profit from the government's arms deal after French arms company Thales had cut him out as empowerment partner.
Willie Hofmeyr, head of the asset forfeiture unit, explained on Wednesday how the assets would be physically transferred if Shaik's appeal was unsuccessful.
"With cases like these, which run concurrently with criminal claims, we obtain a normal civil ruling.
"After the appeals (should the state be successful), Shaik will have to hand over R34m to the state.
Will receive an extra R5m
"And then there will be the 15.5% that has come into effect from Tuesday.
"That means that we will receive an extra R5m if the appeals take a year."
The assets Judge Squires awarded to the state would be kept in custody by a curator until the appeal process had been finalised.
At present, there are two appeal cases: Shaik's appeal against his conviction, and the appeal against Tuesday's asset forfeiture order.
If the first one is successful, Shaik will get his assets back.
But, if his appeals are unsuccessful, he will have to pay R34m plus 15.5% interest to the state.
Hofmeyr said: "If he doesn't do so voluntarily, we can sell some of his assets - also those that had been frozen - until we have enough money.
"We can also seize some of his other assets."
A clear message to criminals
He said Shaik must pay cash to the state and, therefore, the AFU would not take control of his Nkobi Group's 20% shares in African Defence Systems (ADF).
The AFU earlier lauded Judge Squires's ruling as a clear message to criminals that the Organised Crime Prevention Act was an effective piece of legislation.
"This is one of the first huge asset forfeiture claims where the law was tested by the courts and found to be effective.
"This benchmark ruling created a workable precedent for similar cases in the future," said NPA spokesperson Makhosini Nkosi.