EDITORIAL: Jacob Zuma flip-flops in the dock
In most legal cases, the cost of going to court is an important factor
In four successive court cases, lawyers acting for President Jacob Zuma have presented arguments, sometimes holding to their stance for years through the original applications and the appeal proceedings, only to make major legal concessions at the very last moment. If this had happened once, it would be understandable. But four times suggests malfeasance. The question is, what kind of malfeasance? In the latest example this week, Zuma’s lawyer Ishmael Semenya made yet another major admission in conceding that the R17m golden handshake offered to former National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) boss Mxolisi Nxasana was unlawful. The case stretches back to 2015, when Nxasana left the NPA abruptly, accepting a R17m payout, amid an inquiry into his fitness to hold office. Nxasana said afterwards that he believed his forced departure was linked to fears on the part of the president that he would reinstate corruption charges. Subsequently, Corruption Watch, Freedom Under Law and the Council fo...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.