Senior counsel Muzi Sikhakhane told the commission that his client, Zuma, was brought to the state capture inquiry under false pretense and that he could reconsider appearing before the commission.

Sikhakhane asked for an adjournment soon after the lunch break to consult with his client.

"I want my client to make up his mind because it is clear he was brought here under false pretenses. I advised him to come here to cooperate with the inquiry and comply. I want him to now make up his mind whether he wants to be cross-examined because he is being cross-examined here. I advised him to come here, now I want him to reconsider because it is clear to me he is being cross-examined not on what he said, but on what other people said. I need an adjournment with him," an irritable Sikhakhane told the commission sitting in Parktown, Johannesburg.

Commission chairman, Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, granted Sikhakhane a 30-minute adjournment.

Moments earlier, Zuma complained about being questioned on processes of appointing officials, and that he had a problem with questions on details he couldn't remember properly.  

"I thought there were serious matters, such as policy issues that one could be bogged down with. This document, either DG or secretary from Parliament worked on it, I am not sure I should remember every detail," he told the inquiry soon after the lunch break.

Zondo explained that it was important to question him on former minister of public enterprises Barbara Hogan's allegations that he interfered in the appointment of the Transnet CEO and that she sent him a memorandum recommending Sipho Maseko as CEO. Zuma had allegedly insisted that Siyabonga Gama be appointed as CEO despite at the time facing serious misconduct charges at the state-owned enterprise.  

"I think it's fair to say that as former president, there might be certain things you might not know as they were dealt with by officials and other people. And there would be others where you would be expected to know. You are free to say you do not know. Maybe what Mr Pretorius is trying to do is make sure that in the light of all Hogan made that you interfered with the processes of appointing the CEO and she goes into details into interactions with you, it might be important for the commission to understand and ask if you remember receiving the report. Some of those answers may be important because when decisions need to be made [by the commission], it might be important to have that full picture," Zondo explained.

Zuma said he did not understand what is meant by "he interfered" when there are processes that involve ministers and state-owned enterprises boards in the appointment of senior officials.

"I hear what you say, but I am being cross-examined and I do not know why. If we look at that particular allegation and her report in terms of the ANC conference on groups and cliques... I did say she expressed her views. If I go through all this but the commission does not take my answer, but it still goes into details, what must my answer be?"

Zondo explained that the commission did not take Hogan's statement as true and needed to hear from other witnesses and would later weigh on the evidence to decide what was the truth.

As Zondo urged Pretorius to try to avoid issues that Zuma might not have details about, Sikhakhane jumped in, accusing the commission of being unfair to his client and cross-examining him.

ANA