Zuma is ‘abusing provisions of justice, but it’s within his rights’

As the court yesterday heard yet another appeal involving former president Jacob Zuma’s controversial arms deal case, legal experts agreed that he is abusing the provisions of justice.

However, they say he is well within his rights to apply for as many appeals available to him until they are exhausted.

The case involving the former president’s application for leave to appeal the dismissal of his attempt at being granted a permanent stay of prosecution on corruption charges was heard yesterday at the KwaZulu-Natal High Court in Pietermaritzburg, with his legal team representing him in his absence.

The charges in question date back to two decades ago and relate to the controversial arms deal involving the French arms dealer, Thales.

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 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 KZN High Court.

Legal expert and Accountability Now director Paul Hoffman said like every other litigation, everyone was entitled to a fair trial and that included the allowance to exercise as many appeals available as possible.

“We know that Zuma’s former legal team said they would adopt the Stalingrad strategy, which [implied] their intention to fight [the case] house by house and street by street.

“There is a common saying that justice delayed is justice denied. But everyone is entitled to a fair trial and in this case the opportunity to persuade the court that he should be granted the permanent stay of persecution.”

He said in this case, Zuma’s only challenge was to persuade the presiding judges that there was a possibility that the higher court could come to a different conclusion.

However, he doubted there was any merit in the arguments Zuma’s legal team presented that would allow for the appeal to be granted.

Zuma’s lawyer, advocate Muzi Sikhakhane, began proceedings yesterday 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 the Supreme Court of Appeal could reach a different outcome to that of the high court.

Another legal expert, University of Pretoria law lecturer Professor Llewelyn Curlewis, said “with all due respect, Zuma and his legal team are responsible for their current state of affairs”.

“It is easy to blame the system but if you are the one largely responsible [for the delays] you can’t complain, which is the argument being made by the state.”

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