The political career of ANC president Jacob Zuma is, to a large extent, in the hands of 10 green-robed judges who will hear his attempt to block evidence that could send him to jail from reaching the National Prosecuting Authority.
Zuma, French arms firm Thint and Zuma's attorney, Mike Hulley, also want the constitutional court to grant them permission to appeal the supreme court of appeal ruling against them last year.
The appeal court declared that the letter of request, issued for the NPA by the Durban high court to obtain 13 original documents from Mauritius, and the search and seizure warrants used to attach documents at their properties, was lawful.
In a hearing tomorrow and Wednesday the constitutional court will determine the validity of Zuma's argument that the documents were unlawful and released to NPA illegally by Mauritian authorities.
The documents include a diary belonging to Thint official Alain The'tard, in which he made an entry that he was to meet JZ and SS at 10.30am on March 11 2000.
The meeting is believed to be where a R500000-a-year bribe for Zuma was finalised.
In their constitutional court application Zuma, Thint and Hulley say their constitutional rights to dignity, property and in Zuma's case fair trial, were violated.
A top lawyer said the recent constitutional court admission by jailed fraudster and Zuma's former financial adviser, Schabir Shaik, that he bribed Zuma with intention to corrupt him, has given the state further ammunition against Zuma.
The lawyer said the NPA did not have to rely on the original documents. It could convince the trial court that it had tried hard and failed to get them and had no option but to use the copies it already has.
Shaik was successfully prosecuted and jailed after the court allowed copies of the documents to be used as evidence in court.
Zuma and Thint's tria is scheduled for August 4 in the Pietermaritzburg high court.