Presidential front-runner Jacob Zuma asked a court on Monday to scrap a long-running graft case against him, a bid the state described as pointless.

Lawyers for the leader of the ruling African National Congress told the Pietermaritzburg High Court that he was not consulted when the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) made an about-turn in its original decision not to prosecute him.

But State advocate Wim Trengove said Zuma's bid to have the decision to prosecute him declared unlawful, was "with respect, besides the point".

The charges

Zuma faces a charge of racketeering, four charges of corruption, a charge of money laundering and 12 charges of fraud related to a multi-billion rand arms government arms deal.

Support for Zuma outside the court got off to a slow start in the morning, but by late afternoon the group of hundreds of supporters had swollen to several thousand.

Some 300 South African Communist Party members blocked two lanes of traffic near the court and were directed back by the police into the closed-off road in front of the court.

More supporters arrived

As arguments continued in court after lunchtime, more and more supporters arrived, whistling and dancing, including a man dressed in an overall touting a plastic machine gun.

Trengove told Judge Chris Nicholson that a decision to prosecute set off a series of events, including the accused's right to defend himself.

Disputes over the decision to prosecute should be decided in a criminal trial and not in a separate action, added Trengove. "It [the decision to prosecute] is merely a decision to trigger a hearing," said Trengove.

He said the application brought by Zuma did not mean that he was innocent.

"What it [the application] says, is that, 'I should not be put on trial because the decision was unfair'."

Trengove said the ultimate examination of the rights would take place during the criminal trial.

The defence's arguments

Earlier, Zuma's lawyer, Kemp J Kemp, presented arguments around the interpretation of section 179(5)(d) of the Constitution.

Zuma is claiming that the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) was obliged in terms of that section to give him the opportunity to make representations before it decided to prosecute him in 2005 and 2007.

Normally, an accused would not have a right to make representations at the decision to prosecute, but Zuma argued that in the case of a reversal of a decision, the Constitution stated that he did have such a right.

Zuma is claiming that the decision to prosecute him was a reversal of a decision taken by the former NDPP, Bulelani Ngcuka. He announced in August 2003 that the National Prosecuting Authority would not prosecute Zuma, because it did not believe that it had a "winnable case".

But after Zuma's financial advisor, Schabir Shaik, was found guilty of corruption in 2005, the state decided to charge Zuma after all.

The charges related to a government arms deal where Zuma allegedly used his influence to get lucrative arms contracts for Shaik's Nkobi Holdings, in return for payments totalling more than R4 million.

Nkobi Holdings and Thomson-CSF Holdings owned African Defence Systems, which won arms deal contracts.

The two South African subsidiaries of French arms manufacturer Thales International (formerly known as Thomson-CFS) —Thint Holdings (Southern Africa) Pty Ltd and Thint (Pty) Ltd — are co-accused and each face a charge of racketeering and two counts of corruption. Their case has been postponed until 8 December.

Zuma further allegedly agreed to protect Thint Holdings (Thomson-CSF Holdings) from an investigation into alleged corruption in the arms deal, in return for a R500 000 a year bribe. So far, Zuma has been mostly unsuccessful in attempts to block the state's case.

Last week, a Constitutional Court challenge by Zuma failed. He contested the lawfulness of search and seizure operations by the state.

His case has had a ripple effect on politics in South Africa. Zuma is the front-runner to be elected as president next year and the ongoing uncertainty over his legal fate has cast a shadow over his election campaign.

'No need to probe arms deal'

Ngcuka, the first man to publicly mention Zuma's alleged involvement in the corruption charges, eventually resigned from office after a leak in the media accused him of being an apartheid spy.

His predecessor, Willem Heath, who was also investigating the arms deal, resigned in 2000. This came after the justice minister at the time, Penuell Maduna, announced that he would disband the Heath unit.

Around the same time, Zuma told Parliament's standing committee on public accounts that there was no need to probe the arms deal.

After Ngcuka's departure, Vusi Pikoli was appointed as chief prosecutor but he has since been suspended by President Thabo Mbeki in a separate matter.

Media reports have also pulled Mbeki into allegations of bribery in the arms deal.

Since Zuma's election as ANC president at Polokwane last December, the ANC, who has repeatedly said that Zuma was being persecuted, has announced that it would disband the Scorpions.

Sapa