Zuma absent during his latest attempt to avoid corruption charges

Former President Jacob Zuma was absent at the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Friday, where his application for leave to appeal the dismissal of his attempt at being granted a permanent stay of prosecution on corruption charges is being heard.

The charges date back two decades and relate to the controversial arms deal.

Zuma’s lawyer, advocate Muzi Sikhakhane, began proceedings by apologising to the court for using language in the papers accompanying his appeal application which the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) slammed as being “disrespectful”.

It was reported on Thursday that the NPA responded to Zuma’s leave to appeal in a submission saying that it was “regrettably marred by disrespectful and intemperate language, and allegations directed at the full bench”.

Based on this, the NPA wants Zuma to pay the application’s costs regardless of the outcome.

While he apologised for the language deemed offensive, he argued that the leave to appeal should be granted, as that the Supreme Court of Appeal could reach a different outcome to the High Court in Pietermaritzburg.

READ MORE: Zuma lawyer: Corruption trial will be ‘mob justice’ from people who talk of ‘f**king Indians’

Another of Zuma’s lawyers, Dan Mantsha, told EWN the crux of the former president’s argument was that they were seeking to prosecute Zuma in a way that was inconsistent with the constitution and the law.

Zuma stands accused of having received bribes from French arms company Thales, channelled through his former adviser Schabir Shaik, who was convicted on corruption and fraud charges in 2004.

It is claimed that Thales paid Zuma — who was deputy president of the country at the time — R500,000 a year for political cover.

On October 11, his bid to be granted a permanent stay of prosecution was dismissed by a full bench at the Pietermaritzburg High Court.

Sikhakhane argued that, whether Zuma was corrupt or not, he had been treated improperly due to alleged bias and political influence. He also appeared to say that he personally did not consider Zuma corrupt.

He said the first question he’d asked his client when he met him was: “Are you corrupt, Mr Zuma?”

He said this was a question he’d pondered because “as we meet in our coffee shops in our white, leafy suburbs to talk about Mr Zuma, to seek white validation and impress our friends, we have never for a moment paused to think of what do we know that he did”.

(Compiled by Daniel Friedman. Background reporting, Charles Cilliers)

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.