Zuma meeting with legal team to discuss ‘range of issues’

The JG Zuma Foundation on Tuesday said former President Jacob Zuma will be meeting with his legal time “to discuss a wide range of issues.”

Zuma’s parole: Latest updates

Meeting with legal team

The foundation said it will provide further updates in due course, adding that his team “lives in the hope the Recision Application will be successful and reaffirm” Zuma’s rights.

“Equality before the law should mean [former] President Zuma’s rights as enshrined in the Constitution cannot be waived. In the meantime, we welcome the medical parole”.

This follows after Zuma was granted medical parole on Sunday, 5 September, just 58 days after being incarcerated at at the Estcourt Correctional Services facility in KwaZulu-Natal.

Medical parole granted on Sunday

Spokesperson Singabakho Nxumalo said the former president was granted parole in terms of Section 75(7)(a) of the Correctional Services Act 111 of 1998.

Nxumalo said the eligibility of parole was impelled by a medical report received by the Department of Correctional Services, stating Zuma was physically incapacitated.

“Apart from being terminally ill and physically incapacitated, inmates suffering from an illness that severely limits their daily activity or self-care can also be considered for medical parole”. 

Needless to say, backlash ensued.

Lack of transparency ‘outrageous’

Ernst Roets, Head of Policy and Action at AfriForum, said the organisation’s legal team was ready to challenge Zuma’s medical parole.

Roets said the lack of transparency in a high-profile case such as this was ‘outrageous’.

“In view of the urgency of the matter and the potential violation of justice, Fraser is requested in terms of the attorney’s letter to respond by September 10th,”

READ MORE: AfriForum ready to challenge Zuma’s medical parole

Mockery of SA Law

The Democratic Alliance (DA) said the decision to grant parole made a “mockery of South African law”, adding it was in violation of the Correctional Matters Amendment Act of 2011″.

Party leader John Steenhuisen said an independent board should have confirmed if the patient in question – in this case, Zuma – was indeed deserving of medical parole.

He questioned the legality of the parole and the medical report, due to Zuma’s refusal to consent to a medical examination.

Steenhuisen said the DCS also failed to disclose if Zuma met the following criteria:

• The prisoner must suffer from a terminal illness or be rendered physically incapacitated due to injury, disease or illness;
• The risk of re-offending must be low; and
• There must be appropriate arrangements for care in the community to which the prisoner is to be released.

ALSO READ: DA to have Zuma’s medical parole decision reviewed