Former president Jacob Zuma still insists that the conduct of two former prosecuting heads, advocates Bulelani Ngcuka and Vusi Pikoli, was grossly unprofessional and because of this, he should not be prosecuted for alleged corruption.
In a 23-page submission on why the Pietermaritzburg High Court should grant him an application for leave to appeal his corruption case, Zuma’s lawyers said the October 11 ruling against their client handed down by a full bench of judges was “misfocused. Zuma filed the papers on Friday, the last day of the stipulated time to appeal. A full hearing will now be heard on November 22.
By lodging this appeal, Zuma is engaged in three simultaneous court battles as he is also appealing a Durban High Court ruling that compelled him to pay former tourism minister, Derek Hanekom, R500000 for calling him a “known enemy agent.” Zuma filed the papers on Friday, the last day of the stipulated time to appeal. A full hearing will now be heard on November 22.
By lodging this appeal, Zuma is engaged in three simultaneous court battles as he is also appealing a Durban High Court ruling that compelled him to pay former tourism minister, Derek Hanekom, R500000 for calling him a “known enemy agent.” This principle does not reflect the true constitutional position in the South African legal system.” As a result of this, Mantsha highlighted that the High Court had failed to pay due regard to the Constitution and the right to a fair trial. He further argued that it was wrong for the court to say Zuma did not suffer any harm because of the “misconduct” of the NPA.
“The court misfocused on the gist of the application and adopted a sanitised version of facts biased against Mr Zuma and aimed at assisting the NPA’s violation of Mr Zuma’s constitutional right,” he argued.
Mantsha also accused the court of ignoring the gross misconduct by Ngcuka and Pikoli, saying the full bench of the court had failed to address the prejudice Zuma suffered as a result of their conduct.
He argued that the decision by Pikoli to prosecute his client was informed by outside influences – even after his team of prosecutors advised him to wait until the investigation was concluded.
He said the result of Pikoli’s hurried decision to charge his client became evident when the case was struck off the roll in 2006 because the NPA was not ready to prosecute him as it was still gathering evidence. Zuma makes a return before the Zondo Commission of Inquiry next week.
In other news – Another Busisiwe Mkhwebane report faces court scrapping
Yet another report from Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane‘s office faces being scrapped by the courts. Civil society organisation #UniteBehind announced on Monday that it had submitted a review application to the North Gauteng high court against Mkhwebane’s “whitewash” April report into corruption and maladministration at the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa). The organisation is requesting that the report be set aside.
Mkhwebane’s investigation stemmed from the findings of her predecessor Thuli Madonsela, who in 2015 released the “Derailed” report, which revealed corruption at Prasa under the board of former chairperson Sfiso Buthelezi and his then chief executive, Lucky Montana. Read more