Our website use cookies to improve and personalize your experience and to display advertisements (if any). Our website may also include cookies from third parties like Google Adsense, Google Analytics, and Youtube. By using the website, you consent to the use of cookies.

The horse has bolted – SA’s highest court judges tell Zuma

IN rejecting his application for the decision to jail him for 15 months to be rescinded, judges in the Constitutional Court, South Africa’s highest court, have had some tough words for former president Jacob Zuma.

The judges of the Constitutional Court, in a majority judgment, found that there were no grounds for the court to overturn its own judgment and said it would not be in the interest of justice to do so. 

Zuma, who has served two of his 15 months sentence, has been granted medical parole and will serve the rest of his sentence outside prison. The decision to grant him parole is being challenged by the Democratic Alliance and the Helen Suzman Foundation.

In their judgment on Friday, the Constitutional Court judges – in a decision read by Judge Sisi Khampepe – said the rescission application was a misdirected attempt to bring his defence to contempt proceedings when “the horse has effectively bolted”.

Advertisements

“Mr Zuma had multiple opportunities to bring these arguments to this Court’s attention. That he opted not to, the effect being that the order was made in the absence of any defence, does not mean that this Court committed an error in granting the order. In addition, and even if Mr Zuma’s defences could be relied upon in a rescission application, to meet the “error” requirement, he would need to show that this Court would have reached a different decision, had it been furnished with one or more of these defences at the time,” Khampepe said.

READ:  South Africa's ruling ANC suspends membership of ex-leader Zuma

On Zuma’s submission that they took into account hearsay evidence in determining his sentence, Khampepe said:

“Mr Zuma submits that this Court erroneously took into account hearsay evidence when determining the appropriate sanction. Again, the majority judgment reasoned that this Court was entitled to take these statements into account and found that to adjudicate the matter without considering them would be to do so with one eye closed. 

“We need not, nor can we, in rescission proceedings, return to an issue that has already been addressed. The same is true of his submissions in respect of how this Court “singled him out” and “tailor-made” his sanction on account of his position as former President.”

In respect to the former president’s argument that Constitutional Court Judge Dhana Pillay should have excused herself, the court found that the submissions were unfounded and unmeritorious. 

Khampepe said: “These vitriolic comments beg only one question: if Mr Zuma took issue with Pillay AJ’s participation in this matter, why was this not raised upfront in the contempt application – why was no recusal application brought? None of the “grounds” advanced constitutes rescindable errors.”

On Zuma’s allegation that the majority decision to jail him infringed his constitutional rights, the judges said:  

“Importantly, these issues were substantively ventilated in the contempt judgment, which did not, as Mr Zuma suggests, consider his absence as a waiver of his constitutional rights. These issues were debated at length, by both the majority and the minority judgments. Of course, Mr Zuma’s preference for the minority judgment’s conclusion over that of the majority was to be expected. But the fact that the minority differs from the majority does not give rise to a rescindable error.”

READ:  SA High Court asked to review, set aside Zuma’s medical parole

It was the latest legal setback for the 79-year-old anti-apartheid veteran from the ruling African National Congress, whose presidency between 2009-2018 was marred by widespread allegations of graft and malfeasance. He denies wrongdoing.

“Obviously the foundation is disappointed with this judgement,” Mzwanele Manyi, spokesman for the JG Zuma Foundation, said in response.

NEW TRIAL STARTING

Advertisements

Zuma’s jailing on July 7, after handing himself over to police at the last minute, triggered some of the worst riots and looting in decades, with more than 300 people killed and thousands of businesses pillaged and razed.

The violence, which President Cyril Ramaphosa described as a “failed insurrection”, was also fuelled by frustration among largely Black communities still in squalid conditions long after the ANC swept to power in South Africa’s first democratic elections in 1994.

A former senior intelligence operative with the ANC’s then banned military wing uMkhonto we Sizwe before rising to the highest office, Zuma says he is the victim of a political witchhunt and that acting Chief Justice Raymond Zondo is biased.

Zondo served as chairman of the graft inquiry.

Ousted as president by Ramaphosa in 2018, Zuma faces a separate corruption trial linked to his sacking as deputy president in 2005, when he was implicated in a $2 billion government arms deal.

That long-delayed trial against Zuma, who denies multiple charges including corruption, racketeering and money laundering, continues next week. – African Mirror Reporter and Thomson Reuters Foundation.

Advertisements
By The African Mirror

MORE FROM THIS SECTION