Duduzane Zuma should probably have been prosecuted – report
According to leaked emails, eight months after a magistrate in effect found Duduzane had a case to answer, the NPA thought they 'lacked enough evidence'.
Jacob Zuma’s son Duduzane appears at Randburg Magistrate’s Court, 22 August 2014, for inquest into an accident involving in February in which one person was killed. Picture: Valentina Nicol
Eight months after the Randburg Magistrate’s Court’s Lalitha Chetty found “the death of the deceased Phumzile Dube was prima facie brought about by the negligent act of suspect 2, Mr [Duduzane] Zuma”, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) sent an email to the young Zuma’s lawyer Gary Mazaham on 18 August 2015 that said: “I decline to prosecute. There are no prospects of a successful prosecution”.
Chetty had, however, in effect earlier ruled that Zuma should face prosecution after he was involved in a horrific accident with his Porsche that resulted in the death of Dube, a taxi passenger.
In a report based on the #GuptaEmails released by Tiso Blackstar media this morning, it has been alleged that the NPA buried the case regarding the incident that took place on the M1 on 11 December 2014 when Zuma’s Porsche collided with a taxi. Dube died on the spot, while another passenger, Jeanette Mashaba, passed away in hospital a few weeks later due to “natural causes”.
It has now been reported “for the first time” that the NPA allegedly decided against prosecuting as a result of “existing, insufficient evidence” and opted to let the Randburg Magistrate’s Court decide.
However, when the magistrate ruled that Zuma was indeed negligent, the NPA still failed to prosecute.
READ MORE: Car crash was tragic – Duduzane Zuma
Chetty ruled: “He [Zuma] failed to conduct himself in a reasonable manner under the circumstances and adverse weather conditions,” and rejected the defence’s argument that the Porsche had “aquaplaned” (sliding uncontrollably on a wet surface).
Zuma had admitted he sped to overtake a car that was splashing water on the windscreen of his low-slung Porsche, as stated in court records. Chetty said, considering the heavy downpour at the time, Zuma should have slowed down.
An attorney representing the deceased’s family, David Maree, was understood to have been surprised by the decision.
“My understanding was from a law point of view, when someone is responsible for a death or an accident, the next procedure would be a criminal matter that would follow against the person.”
NPA spokesperson Luvuyo Mfaku was qouted as saying, however, that there was nothing untoward about the case.
“The finding of the magistrate is based on a balance of probabilities. The standard of proof in a criminal trial, beyond reasonable doubt, cannot be met on the available evidence.
“That can also be inferred from from the reasoning of the magistrate who refers to the evidence of Mr Zuma as the basis for the finding,” said Mfaku.
An NPA source close to the case also told the media group they were surprised by the decision not to prosecute as Zuma’s negligence should have been prosecuted.
The same NPA has declined to prosecute Duduzane’s father, President Jacob Zuma, on 783 charges of corruption despite having lost an appeal that in effect automatically reinstated the charges against the president.
For more news your way, follow The Citizen on Facebook and Twitter.
