LETTER: Question mark over possible early release for Zuma
Our criminal justice system does not contemplate civil imprisonment prisoners, a unique and rare category of people
11 July 2021 - 22:08
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
Former president Jacob Zuma. Picture: SANDILE NDLOVU
The justice minister has let it be known that he believes the Correctional Services Act applies and may entitle Jacob Zuma to early release from prison after serving 3.75 months, being a quarter of his sentence. The calculation is correct if the act applies to the incarceration of Zuma at the instance of the state capture commission by the Constitutional Court in proceedings of a civil nature that did not involve the criminal justice administration until the arrest warrant was signed after judgment was passed.
However, there is a different way of looking at the term of imprisonment imposed. Our criminal justice system does not contemplate civil imprisonment prisoners, a unique and rare category of people. In principle, and in terms, the Correctional Services Act and the Criminal Procedure Act simply do not apply. Civil imprisonment was abolished in 1977. Civil imprisonment for contempt of court is an exception that has been kept alive to enable our courts to defend their dignity, accessibility and effectiveness.
In principle, Zuma could probably have gained his instantaneous release by purging his contempt by apologising genuinely for his contempt of our highest court and undertaking to co-operate fully with the Zondo commission. Instead, his replying affidavit in the “rescission” proceedings set down for hearing on Monday, July 12, manifests a settled determination to stick to his defence of deceitful defiance. Whether this attitude amounts to aggravated contempt justifying further punishment, and whether the court intended incarceration for the full 15 months, are topics that should be canvassed during argument.
Paul Hoffman SC Director, Accountability Now
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an e-mail with your comments. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Send your letter by e-mail to letters@businesslive.co.za. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Support our award-winning journalism. The Premium package (digital only) is R30 for the first month and thereafter you pay R129 p/m now ad-free for all subscribers.
LETTER: Question mark over possible early release for Zuma
Our criminal justice system does not contemplate civil imprisonment prisoners, a unique and rare category of people
The justice minister has let it be known that he believes the Correctional Services Act applies and may entitle Jacob Zuma to early release from prison after serving 3.75 months, being a quarter of his sentence. The calculation is correct if the act applies to the incarceration of Zuma at the instance of the state capture commission by the Constitutional Court in proceedings of a civil nature that did not involve the criminal justice administration until the arrest warrant was signed after judgment was passed.
However, there is a different way of looking at the term of imprisonment imposed. Our criminal justice system does not contemplate civil imprisonment prisoners, a unique and rare category of people. In principle, and in terms, the Correctional Services Act and the Criminal Procedure Act simply do not apply. Civil imprisonment was abolished in 1977. Civil imprisonment for contempt of court is an exception that has been kept alive to enable our courts to defend their dignity, accessibility and effectiveness.
In principle, Zuma could probably have gained his instantaneous release by purging his contempt by apologising genuinely for his contempt of our highest court and undertaking to co-operate fully with the Zondo commission. Instead, his replying affidavit in the “rescission” proceedings set down for hearing on Monday, July 12, manifests a settled determination to stick to his defence of deceitful defiance. Whether this attitude amounts to aggravated contempt justifying further punishment, and whether the court intended incarceration for the full 15 months, are topics that should be canvassed during argument.
Paul Hoffman SC
Director, Accountability Now
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an e-mail with your comments. Letters of more than 300 words will be edited for length. Send your letter by e-mail to letters@businesslive.co.za. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
LETTER: Jacob Zuma finally gets his comeuppance
Jacob Zuma to remain in prison after stay of arrest application fails
LETTER: ANC shows its true colours with support for ‘brave Zuma’
POLITICAL WEEK AHEAD: Jacob Zuma back at top court to appeal contempt charges
Police to monitor court site as judges hear Zuma’s bid to get out of jail
LETTER: Immoral ANC has lost the ability to do good
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.
Most Read
Related Articles
MAC MAHARAJ: Patriotism is loyalty to the constitution
‘Enough’ police to manage pro-Zuma protests in KZN, Bheki Cele says
A Rubicon moment
TONY LEON: Power of the courts prevail against SA’s once-most-powerful citizen
PETER ATTARD MONTALTO: Maybe it’s time for grown-up conversations about hard ...
EDITORIAL: A victory for constitutionalism
LETTER: Let Zuma’s arrest be unifying event
Published by Arena Holdings and distributed with the Financial Mail on the last Thursday of every month except December and January.