The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) insists that there is “not a shred of evidence” that the state’s decision to prosecute former president Jacob Zuma for corruption was politically motivated. Advocate Wim Trengove SC, who is arguing the state’s case for why Zuma and French arms company Thales must be tried for racketeering and corruption, dismissed Zuma’s allegations that his prosecution was fatally tainted by political interference, on Thursday morning. Trengove further argued that there was a clear “public interest” in ensuring the prosecution of serious crimes, such as the racketeering and corruption charges that Zuma and Thales stand accused of. He added that it was crucial that “powerful political figures” accused of such crimes not get “special treatment”. He contends that former national director of public prosecutions Vusi Pikoli had little option but to charge Zuma for corruption, given the “devastating” judgment made against Zuma’s former financial adviser, Schabir S...

BL Premium

This article is reserved for our subscribers.

A subscription helps you enjoy the best of our business content every day along with benefits such as exclusive Financial Times articles, ProfileData financial data, and digital access to the Sunday Times and Sunday Times Daily.

Already subscribed? Simply sign in below.

Questions or problems? Email or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now