fbpx
Connect with us

South Africa

As Zuma Takes A Jab At Justice Zondo and The South African Judiciary, the C2C Community Analyses the Meaning and Impact of the Former President’s Statements in His Press Release

Brian Kazungu

Published

on

President Zuma

Brian Kazungu, 01/02/2021

In his Press Statement dated 1 February 2021 and titled Statement On Constitutional Court Decision Compelling Me To Appear Before The Commission Of Inquiry Into Allegations Of State Capture, President Zuma took a jab at Justice Zondo and The South African Judiciary.

He accused the Commission, its Chairperson and the legal system in South Africa for being politicized and being partisan at the expense of justice and expressed his unwillingness to further corporate with commission its compromised state.

iniAfrica news extracted four critical points from President Zuma’s Statement for analysis with the Connections2Communities (C2C) initiative which is a member based group that incorporates shared knowledge, insights and experiences of its members in solving community problems.

Below are the four points (statements) raised by President Zuma and the comments (responses) of the C2C Legal Literacy Group.

President Zuma: “He (Zondo) literally created a dispute of fact in an application about him and continued to adjudicate the matter where his version was being contested by me.”

C2C Legal Literacy Group: Zuma is saying that the constitutional dictates that a fair trial calls for an independent and impartial tribunal. An application was made by Zuma for the recusal of Zondo to preside on a dispute that involves Zondo’s own version as to whether the allegation that Zondo and Zuma were known personally to each other was valid or not.

Zuma has his own version that they knew other very well to disqualify Zondo from presiding over a matter that Zuma believes was conceived and prosecuted as an anti-Zuma project.

Zuma takes issue with the way Zondo was appointed and the idea of the Commission was born.

He argues that once a dispute of fact is thrown into the mix, the dispute can only be fairly dealt with by way of a trial and not by motion proceedings.

Zuma argues that the existence and establishment of the Commission is also in dispute especially having regard to the fact that he was unconstitutionally put in an invidious position of outsourcing the power that the Constitution reserves for a President to establish a Commission solely aimed at attacking his dignity and reputation.

It is alleged that the Zondo railroaded the recusal application with the knowledge that no court of law would challenge his finding.

Zuma who acquiesced to what he describes as judicial capture of the President believes that he has a just cause to expose the way the judiciary was complicit in undermining the rule of law and constitutionalism.

Zuma says he is a friend of Zondo and Zondo says that he is not a friend of Zuma.  How best can the truth be established when one is a referee and player of a game?

President Zuma: It is clear that the laws of this country are politicised even at the highest court in the land.

C2C Legal Literacy Group: What is Zuma saying when he alleges that is CLEAR that the laws of the country are politicized?

He was a former President of the ruling party and the Republic of South Africa. For a person like him to make this politically charged allegation, means that he has lost all political gravitas in the ANC to have his perspective accepted and understood.

The role of the judiciary in inducing or coercing Zuma to accept his demise and the consequence of a spear aimed principally at him is a subject matter for another day suffice to say that the promise of liberty in the Constitution that is entitled to all SA citizens was taken away from Zuma leaving him with no room to manoeuvre.

Zuma is making the point that the doctrine of separation of powers precludes any judicial encroachment into the arena of the exercise of public power reserved for the executive.

There can be no doubt that Zuma’s version of facts confirm that he did not make the suicidal choice to establish a commission to investigate himself but his comrades in the ANC abandoned him to what he terms judicial vultures to skin him alive.

He makes the poignant point that even the Chief Justice, a man who took an oath to promote and protect the constitution had a hand in it.

Does Zuma trust anyone with public power? Clearly after his personal experience, he may not have any reason to do so.

If public trust and confidence in the judiciary as a guardian of the rule of law, the existence and operation of the Zondo Commission must worry any constitutionalist.

It is now law that the powers reserved for the President can be altered and taken away without any common sense, reason and logic being offended.

What is a coup? Zuma alleges that a coup was wilfully and intentionally authored outside the four corners of legality and to have a Deputy Chief Justice presiding over the Commission is an indictment of the promise of justice inherent in any constitutional dispensation.

Zuma argues that if the people to whom justice and fairness must find best expression are the very people who undermine both, then what good is it to be a free man?

President Zuma: It is also patently clear to me that I am being singled out for different and special treatment by the judiciary and the legal system as a whole.

C2C Legal Literacy Group: When this group was created and started operating, the hope was that minds would be provoked to speak truth to power without favour or prejudice.

In this dispute, it would appear on the face of the facts presented that Zuma willingly established a commission of inquiry to among other ancillary matters, investigate and find him as the most corrupt person to ever have occupied the highest office in the land.

However, Zuma says that it is PATENTLY clear to him as must be to anyone who possesses common sense, logic, and reason that the idea and ideal of the Commission disguised as a judicial enterprise was to single him out as an exceptional corrupt person.

The Constitution provides for the office of the President who must work with a cabinet that serves at his pleasure.

The administration of departments of government is assigned to Ministers. With respect to state-owned enterprises, it is trite that they are creatures of law and the control and direction of such organs is vested and ought to be vested in the board of directors.

Zuma argues that no evidence has been led that the corporate veils of such institutions have been pierced in a transparent and open process that is consistent with the limitations imposed in terms of the Constitution and the laws of the country.

By asking the former President to personally speak on behalf of institutions whose control and direction fell outside his mandate, he argues that this confirms that the promise cannot be an outcome that is in the interests of justice and fairness.

He believes rightly or wrongly that he is being singled by the very people who are supposed to protect his constitutional rights.

The onus on the parties that allege that he did what he is alleged to have done in undermining the rule of law would appear to Zuma that it has been shifted to allow a legal absurdity to exist that the presumption of innocence is no longer a promise.

If the Zuma standard can be the law, who would be safe, he asks? It means that Ministers can escape scrutiny and directors who presided over the alleged malfeasance and corruption can simply point a finger to the President as the Chief Culprit.

Who are the cheerleaders to this travesty of justice? Zuma alleges that the whole legal system seems to be active in giving life to an untenable precedent.

What time is it? It is self-evident that if Zuma had any confidence in the promise of the protection of the law to any accused especially to him, that confidence has been drained and downloaded completely.

President Zuma: In the circumstances, I am left with no other alternative but to be defiant against injustice as I did against the apartheid government.

C2C Legal Literacy Group: Zuma is in a legal corner.  He has been placed in this corner by his own comrades who constructively played a part in creating a precedent that will haunt many President to come.

He knew that his fate was precooked and predetermined.  He naively trusted the constitutional promise of an independent and impartial justice system.

He appointed some of the actors he now blames for setting a trap for him. His relationship with the Guptas or rather his alleged relationship with this family created the fodder to create a public perception that his conduct or alleged conduct was unconscionable.

What is fact or fiction? It is not easy to establish and distinguish between fact and fiction when the people who are by law vested with the discretionary powers to test evidence appear in the mind of Zuma and many others to have made up their mind?

What is the state? Does a shared understanding exist on what the state is and is not let alone whether this innovation in the dictionary of mankind speaks to reality and the legality of the construction inherent in the importation of this term?

In what form does the state exist? What does state capture means? Can a living, mortal and fallible human being be capable of being an alter ego of this human construct?

After capture, what would the state look like? Can a human being with two ears, two legs and two eyes be capable of substituting other human beings to even pretend to be exceptional and give rise to the reality implied in the term state capture?

When does the promise of justice transform itself into the reality of injustice? Where is wisdom and understanding to be found when allegations are boldly made that the judiciary is part of a scheme to prove a point using Zuma as the case study?

Zuma has arrived at the inescapable conclusion that he cannot be expected to volunteer or be forced into a lion’s den and expect to come out alive.

He knows what the outcome is and that there is little that he can do to mitigate it. If he was bullied to establish a commission to nail him, what more can he do when his dignity has been sufficiently undermined to give him no legal refuge?

Today it is Zuma, but who will be next?

Brian Kazungu is an Author, Poet, Journalist, and Technology Enthusiast whose writing covers issues to do with Business, Travelling, Motivation and Inspiration, Religion, Politics, and Communication among others. https://www.amazon.com/author/briankazungu https://muckrack.com/brian-kazungu http://www.modernghana.com/author/BrianKazungu [email protected] @BKazungu-Twitter He has written and published several books covering various aspects of human life including leadership, entrepreneurship, politics, personal development as well as poetry and travel. These books are found on Amazon https://www.amazon.com/author/briankazungu

Continue Reading
1 Comment

Warning: Undefined variable $user_ID in /home/iniafrica/public_html/wp-content/themes/zox-news/comments.php on line 49

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply