Will Zuma’s ‘Stalingrad’ strategy work to his advantage in 2025?

At 82-years-old, former President Jacob Zuma has faced a mine-field of legal challenges from his arms deal, to the private prosecution of President Cyril Ramaphosa and the fight to keep his new home the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MK) among the big wigs in the political landscape.

Prominent defence attorney William Booth said the plethora of applications brought by Zuma before the various courts in his attempt to appeal rulings against him are “ridiculous” and it’s time for the courts to set a precedent against such applications.

‘Ridiculous’

“This whole process, if you can call it a process, or saga or circus whichever way you want to discuss these applications brought by former President Zuma is quite ridiculous.

“I think it’s about time that the court actually states categorically that if lawyers bring such applications on behalf of whoever and there is absolutely no basis, they must be held accountable,” Booth told broadcaster 702 earlier this year.

However, Zuma has continued with his various appeals and applications.

While it has taken two decades, several postponements and millions in legal fees to kick off Zuma’s arms deal case – legal experts concede the politician’s “Stalingrad”- defence strategy has paid off.

Zuma has been charged with French arms company Thales for fraud, corruption, money laundering and racketeering, linked to the 1999 multi-billion-rand defence procurement project.

ALSO READ: Zuma unsuccessful in bid to change April 2025 arms deal trial date [VIDEO]

Zuma battles

His ongoing battles include the tenacious attempt to legally remove the prosecutor in his case Billy Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan through private prosecution over the leaking of a medical certificate.

Zuma also initiated a private prosecution against President Cyril Ramaphosa on the eve of the African National Congress’ (ANC) national elective conference on 15 December 2022.

He accused Ramaphosa of being an “accessory after the fact” to another private prosecution he was pursuing against prosecutor Downer and Maughan for an alleged breach of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act.

The former president based his attempt to prosecute Ramaphosa on an accusation that the president failed to act after he complained Downer had misbehaved.

However, Zuma suffered a blow. Less than 24 hours after Zuma’s attempt the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg dismissed his application with costs in a unanimous judgment.

The former president approached the court seeking to overturn a previous judgment, which ruled the former president may not prosecute Ramaphosa.

Will Zuma finally go on trial?

Zuma may finally go on trial in 2025.

In September, Zuma’s lawyer unsuccessfully protested over his arms deal corruption trial date remains set for April 2025, as Downer said they would fight for Zuma to finally go on trial.

During proceedings, Zuma’s advocate Nqaba Buthelezi argued that his client had to “take exception” to the proposal of the trial dates.

“We obviously now have to take exception to the proposal, the dates for next year April remain reserved simply because of the absurdity of a proposal.”

This is due to Zuma seeking leave to appeal Chili’s decision that it was not in the interests of justice for Downer to be forced to step down.

“What purpose is served, if we can then enrol a matter that is for all intent and purpose, and from what we can anticipate will still be the subject of an appeal come April next year, and for them to say so casually and simply its Stalingrad strategy?

“We take exception to that as we are just exercising our rights. So, it’s not a creation of ours that this application is not going to be heard at this time of the year as judgment was granted in March. So we would never create the circumstance that causes bad reasons to be given into tenure,” Buthelezi argued.

ALSO READ: Court throws out Zuma’s private prosecution, rules it’s part of ‘Stalingrad strategy’

Petitioning SCA

Buthelezi argued that should Zuma fail in his second attempt to force Downer’s removal, after trying and failing to privately prosecute him, he would again seek to petition the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) and embark on the same appeal litigation strategy that resulted in his arms trial being repeatedly delayed since it was reinstated in 2018.

“So, I think it will be prejudicial to the court to keep blocking those dates when we know we may have those holding dates. To block up two terms is prejudicial to counsel because Mr Downer can’t explain how it could happen while the matter is being appealed.

“Whether that leave to appeal is granted or denied, the appeal avenues that exist in as far as petitioning the SCA and petition further, make it unfeasible that we would sit here with a good mind and good consciousness that we’re going to start a trial at the start of April. That’s not pragmatic, and that’s not possible,” Buthelezi argued.

Arms deal

Zuma’s legal team argued that the trial itself should be postponed indefinitely. However, Chili was having none of it and scheduled Zuma’s appeal hearing for 6 February.

However, Zuma has slammed plans for his 2025 arms deal trial as “premature” and confirmed that he will keep fighting for the removal of Downer.

In May, Judge Nkosinathi Chili confirmed that KwaZulu-Natal High Court Judge President Thoba Portia Poyo-Dlwati had allocated dates from April to September 2025 for Zuma’s trial – 20 years after he was first charged.

Despite multiple courts having rejected Zuma’s various attacks on Downer, Zuma continues with the legal argument that Downer should be removed – and effectively contends that the only way he will agree to his trial proceeding will be if the prosecutor is gone.

ALSO READ: Here’s why Downer will not be removed from Zuma’s arms deal corruption case [VIDEO]

Stalingrad strategy

The last pre-trial hearing of the state’s case against Zuma happened in February 2021. The minutes of that meeting noted that Zuma placed it on record that “he is ready for the trial” but said he reserved his rights.

Zuma’s “Stalingrad” defence strategy has worked to his advantage.

Former public protector advocate Thuli Madonsela said the “Stalingrad” worked “effectively”.

“The delays have undoubtedly bought him time, legitimacy and public sympathy. Sympathy has been earned because the public does not know who is behind the undue delay. His current age (82) is also now working in his favour,” said Madonsela.

The arms deal case needed to be “reviewed from the state’s point of view”, she added.

Academic Dr Llewellyn Curlewis said Zuma was “partially successful in delaying the matter” for so long.

“The mere fact that he is older by now has its implications going forward – even for the best scenario for the state. No one in this country will see to it that an old person is incarcerated for a long term.

“With all the possibilities of appeals, further delays are inevitable – taking up another number of years to conclude,” said Curlewis.

For Professor Koos Malan, Zuma’s “notorious Stalingrad antics, represent one of the most successful episodes of lawfare in SA’s legal history”.

“Yet, it has its own peculiar criteria for success and outlandish means for achieving this peculiar success,” said Malan.

Abuse of the court

In October last year, Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) Judge Nathan Ponnan dismissed Zuma’s appeal against enforcement of the KwaZulu-Natal High Court’s invalidation of his private prosecution.

Ponnan ruled that the private prosecution was “without any foundation in either fact (Mr Downer did not disclose Mr Zuma’s doctor’s report to Ms Maughan and there was no breach of confidentiality or privacy) or law (no cognisable offence has been committed, even if all of the facts alleged by Mr Zuma are true)”,

Ponnan further ruled that “the private prosecution is part of the ‘Stalingrad strategy’ announced by Zuma’s counsel to Hugo J over a decade and a half ago when he said: ‘This is not like a fight between two champ fighters. This is more like Stalingrad. It’s burning house to burning house.’

“It is further demonstrated by the patent lack of substance to the charges; by the fact that Mr Zuma has clearly not pursued the prosecution as would someone intent on obtaining a conviction; and, by Mr Zuma’s identification of witnesses.”

The ruling confirmed the High Court’s finding that the private prosecution was an “abuse of the process of court” that had been pursued for an ulterior purpose.

ALSO READ: Zuma takes Ramaphosa private prosecution fight to ConCourt [VIDEO]

Attacks on judiciary

Ponnan also expressed the court’s unhappiness over Zuma’s attacks on the judiciary

“There is nothing on record to sustain the suggestion that the presiding judges in this matter were biased or not open-minded, impartial or fair.

“The allegations were made with a reckless disregard for the truth. And, whilst not advanced during oral argument, they were not retracted. However, they ought not to have been made at all.

“The propensity to accuse judicial officers of bias, absent a proper factual foundation, is plainly deserving of censure.

“The respondents argue that Mr Zuma should be penalised with a punitive costs order as a mark of this court’s displeasure and to vindicate the integrity of the High Court and the judiciary, a submission with which I cannot but agree,” the judge ruled.

With Zuma’s case repeatedly being delayed by his efforts to remove Downer, 2025 may just be another year filled with legal battles.

ALSO READ: WATCH: Zuma engaged in ‘cynical abuse of the legal system’ − Ngcukaitobi