Zuma has ‘deliberately misconceived’ grounds on which case is made, says Ramaphosa in affidavit

President Cyril Ramaphosa has filed a replying affidavit in his application for an urgent interdict against private prosecution by former president Jacob Zuma, accusing his predecessor of “deliberately misconceiving” the grounds on which his case is made.

Ramaphosa also said Zuma’s affidavit contained “unfounded political innuendos” that are not relevant to his application.

“The first respondent has, in his answering affidavit, deliberately framed my application as being premised entirely on the allegation that the private prosecution is for improper motive and ulterior purpose. The core of the first respondent’s contention is that this court does not enjoy jurisdiction to determine and grant the interdict since the main complaint is that the prosecution is for an improper motive and ulterior purpose – and such a complaint must be determined by the criminal court,” said Ramaphosa.

“The first respondent deliberately misconceives the grounds that I rely on in this application.”

Private prosecution unlawful

Ramaphosa said he approached the courts on an urgent basis to challenge the “unlawful, unconstitutional and invalid” summons and his private prosecution.

“The summonses were issued without a valid nolle prosequi certificate that relates to me and for a charge against me. This breaches both section 7 of the CPA and the Constitution,” said Ramaphosa.

“The nolle prosequi certificates state that the crime to which they relate occurred on 9 August 2021. This date predates the request by the first respondent to me to institute an investigation against the NPA officials on which the alleged crime of accessory after the fact or defeating the end of justice is based.

“The insistence that I can only raise defences in the criminal court suggests that in the first respondent’s mind, his private prosecution is lawful and properly instituted. It is not.”

ALSO READ: Zuma pleased ‘sanity has prevailed’ for Ramaphosa regarding private prosecution

Ramaphosa said should the court does not halt the private prosecution, he will be subjected to an unlawful prosecution.

“By the time the application to set aside the summonses and the certificates is heard, the unlawful private prosecution – in breach of my rights – will be well underway. My constitutional rights, dignity and reputation will be irreparably harmed.”

Urgency not ‘self-created’

While Zuma, in his affidavit, argued that the urgency in Ramaphosa’s application was “self-created”, the president said he lodged his application on an urgent basis based on the serious consequences should he be forced to appear in court.

“The decisive question on urgency is whether I may obtain substantial redress in due course regarding the unlawful summones and their serious consequences. I cannot because once I am forced to appear before this court, and to remain in attendance, on the strength of an unlawful private prosecution, my rights will have been irreparably breached. This includes my right to freedom of movement, my right to dignity, to name a few. The consequences to the general public can also not be reversed.”

READ MORE: ‘Urgency of matter is self-created’ – Zuma files answering affidavit opposing Ramaphosa’s application

Zuma instituted a private prosecution against Ramaphosa on the eve of the African National Congress (ANC) national elective conference, accusing the president of being an “accessory after the fact” in a criminal offence alleged against Advocate William Downer, who is accused of improperly sharing information in terms of the NPA Act.

A full bench of the High Court in Johannesburg will hear Ramaphosa’s interdict application on Thursday, a development the Jacob Zuma Foundation described as a “dramatic twist”.