Ramaphosa vs Zuma: President’s advocate says courts not here to ‘settle political scores’

President Cyril Ramaphosa’s legal team has argued that South Africa’s courts are not meant to ‘settle political scores’ and ‘deal with personal animosity’.

Ramaphosa is challenging the private prosecution by former president Jacob Zuma and seeking to make an interdict granted to him in January permanent, putting an end to the prosecution that he said is doomed to fail and has an ulterior purpose.

The matter is being heard in the Johannesburg High Court on 17 and 18 May.

Private prosecution

Zuma instituted a private prosecution against Ramaphosa on 15 December, in a bid to have prosecutor Billy Downer removed from his arms deal corruption trial on an accusation that the president failed to act after he complained that Downer had behaved improperly.

Zuma, who attended the proceedings, had several supporters in court for the case, including former African National Congress (ANC) member Carl Niehaus and former ANC secretary-general Ace Magashule.

“Frivolous and vexatious”

Ramaphosa’s legal team, led by Advocate Ngwako Maenetje, said the charges that Zuma is pursuing against Ramaphosa are “frivolous and vexatious”.

With great respect, the courts are not there to be used for these sorts of cases, whether to settle political scores or to deal with personal animosity, that is not the place for the courts. The courts are here to defend the Constitution and uphold the rule of law under the Constitution, and this case calls for interference by this court.

ALSO READ: Ramaphosa and Zuma to lock horns in court

Nolle prosequi certificates

Maenetje contended that it was not possible, through “any mental gymnastics”, to say that the nolle prosequi certificates issued against Downer could be used to prosecute the president.

“Even if Mr Zuma has a genuine gripe some day or other, he can’t use these two certificates… We submit that the registrar was wrong to issue a summons.

It is abundantly clear that the certificates don’t relate to any alleged charge against Ramaphosa. We would submit with respect that the case ends right here.

– Maenetje

Maenetje also argued that the certificate used by Zuma to pursue Ramaphosa had lapsed and that there was no evidence that Ramaphosa had committed a criminal offence.

Ramaphosa’s conduct was “perfectly lawful”, he added.

NPA

Maenetje said Zuma only paid the security required for him to pursue his private prosecution against Ramaphosa in April, despite this being a requirement for him to issue the summons against the president, which he did months before.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) also made a brief submissions in the case and stressed that Ramaphosa was “at no stage considered a suspect” in Zuma’s private prosecution.

ALSO READ: Zuma foundation claims to have instituted private prosecution of Ramaphosa