Fraud verdict implicates Mbeki's deputy

South Africa's popular deputy president, Jacob Zuma, was confronted with calls for his resignation yesterday after his former financial adviser and friend was found guilty of corruption in a case that has gripped the nation.

The verdict against Schabir Shaik, Mr Zuma's longtime associate, gravely damaged the deputy president's standing, according to analysts and legal experts, as well as his prospects of succeeding Thabo Mbeki as leader of the country.

Following the judgment, the National Prosecuting Authority said it was considering pressing charges against Mr Zuma. The main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, tabled a motion of no confidence shortly after the verdict, demanding Mr Zuma's resignation. Two other parties also demanded that he quit.

Yesterday's judgment brought to a climax an eight-month trial, the most prominent of several corruption cases since South Africa reached majority rule in 1994.

The case centred on charges that Shaik paid Mr Zuma in return for government contracts and that he solicited a bribe from a French arms firm that would be paid to Mr Zuma, who would protect the company's interests in a multi-billion-dollar arms sale to the South African government.

Public interest was so great that the verdict was broadcast live on national television and radio. It took three days for Judge Hillary Squires to read out his 165-page verdict.

The judgment was damning, finding "not only convincing but overwhelming" evidence of a corrupt relationship between Mr Zuma and Shaik, who now faces a maximum sentence of 15 years in prison. Sentencing is expected today.

Shaik, once known as "the banker for the African National Congress" during the anti-apartheid struggle, was found to have paid Mr Zuma 1.2m rand (£109,000) in bribes from one of his companies, without the knowledge of shareholders.

The verdict was also harsh on Mr Zuma. Testimony showed that he was perpetually short of money and relied on Shaik to provide him with funds to build a luxury house, pay school fees and even give him 500 rand (£45) spending money at the airport.

"The evidence ... clearly shows a readiness in both Shaik to turn to Zuma for help and Zuma's readiness to give it," said Judge Squires, who added that Mr Zuma knew he would have to give something in return for the money.

"Instead of just stabilising the situation and managing Zuma's chaotic finances so debts could be paid off, Shaik made it possible for Zuma to continue living beyond his means without anyone knowing the quid pro quo he [Shaik] would ask for," said Judge Squires. "No sane or rational businessman would conduct his business on such a basis without expecting some benefit."

Mr Zuma did not face charges and was never summoned as a witness, but his name and financial affairs were mentioned almost as frequently as Mr Shaik. Legal experts said the judge's verdict directly implicated Mr Zuma.

The judge ruled that Shaik persuaded the French arms company Thint Holdings (formerly Thomson CSF) to pay a bribe of 500,000 rand (£45,000) a year to Mr Zuma. In return Mr Zuma was to promote the French firm's participation in a 30bn rand (£2.7bn) arms deal. Judge Squires declared that Mr Zuma knew all about the deal and had received one payment.

Mr Zuma, 63, is immensely popular among voters, particularly the trade union movement. But he is now likely to be regarded as a political liability by many in the ANC. Others in the party want to protect South Africa's image as a safe - and relatively honest - destination for investment.

"It's explosive for the deputy president," said constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos. "The facts are there to convict him."

Mr Zuma was on government business in Zambia yesterday and did not comment on the ruling.

The ANC gave a cautious welcome to the ruling, saying it showed "the maturity of our democracy".