Decision by SCA about Jacob Zuma ‘glaringly vague’, foundation says
Jacob Zuma Foundation says Zuma’s legal team will approach the president of the Supreme Court of Appeal for clarity on the ruling
The Jacob Zuma Foundation says the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) is “disappointing but not unexpected”.
The appeals court dismissed former president Jacob Zuma’s leave to appeal against his corruption prosecution, which included his attempt to remove state advocate Billy Downer from the trial.
Zuma’s corruption trial is scheduled to start on April 11. He and French arms company Thales face several charges of corruption‚ racketeering‚ fraud and money-laundering linked to the multibillion-rand arms deal.
In a statement on Monday‚ the foundation said Zuma’s legal team would approach the president of the SCA for clarity on the ruling.
It said it was “astounded by the glaring vagueness and the ambiguity” of the decision.
“A blanket approach and routine order of dismissal do not provide the required clarity. Court judgments are there to provide legal certainty and clarity so subjective inferences are avoided. All litigants are entitled to know the exact and real reasons their cases are successful or not‚ and this is not the case here‚” the foundation said.
The group said Zuma had briefed his legal team to do all that was necessary to approach the president of the SCA‚ in line with the relevant legislation‚ to seek appropriate remedies including reconsideration‚ variation or clarification of the decision.
“All that Zuma wants is a fair trial‚ and will leave no stone unturned to ensure the constitutional promise of the rule of law and equality before the law is evenly applied to all‚” said the foundation.
“For the criminal trial to proceed under the present conditions while these legal protections are being pursued would be a travesty of justice and a vindictive assault on our constitution‚” it said.
Pietermaritzburg trial court judge Piet Koen dismissed Zuma’s “special plea” to remove Downer from his corruption case.
Zuma had entered the “special plea” in terms of the Criminal Procedure Act‚ challenging Downer’s “title to prosecute”.
Koen‚ however‚ ruled that any alleged infringement of his fair trial rights should be determined at the end of the criminal trial‚ and said Zuma’s prospects of appeal were poor.
TimesLIVE