SOWETO, SOUTH AFRICA – DECEMBER 18: President Jacob Zuma during the announcement of new party leadership at the 5th African National Congress (ANC) national conference at the Nasrec Expo Centre on December 18, 2017 in Soweto, South Africa. As ANC delegates‚ supporters of the two presidential candidates were equally confident that their preferred choice will be announced as the new president of the ANC. The race was between Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa‚ the only two nominees for the party's top position. (Photo by Gallo Images / Alet Pretorius)
A signed document from 2006 apparently showing that Jacob Zuma undertook to pay his own legal fees in the event he loses his corruption case has been circulating on social media and was shared by former ANC MP Vytjie Mentor.
The matter of who should pay for Zuma’s legal fees came to the forefront this week as President Cyril Ramaphosa revealed that Zuma’s legal defence has cost taxpayers R15.3 million to date. The president added on Thursday that the state would continue to pay Zuma’s fees until the “fees deal” covering the former president is set aside by a court.
Ramaphosa explained that the deal was struck between then president Thabo Mbeki and Zuma in 2006 and had been based on the provisions of the State Attorney Act. It continues to be in force.
On Thursday, the DA announced it would approach the court to set aside the decision to allow taxpayers’ money to be used to pay Zuma’s legal fees in this manner.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Khusela Diko said in response on Friday that “the president will await the court challenge, look at the merits and then take a decision based on that”.
However, if the faxed legal undertaking that Mentor shared is legitimate, it suggests the agreement to cover Zuma’s legal costs would only be binding in the event that Zuma ultimately wins the case; or is found to have been acting in his official capacity as an officer of the state, and therefore not in his own interests; or if the matter doesn’t go to court at all.
In the leaked fax (supposedly sent from lawyer Michael Hulley’s office), Zuma asks that Hulley and advocate Kemp J Kemp be appointed to conduct his defence. He undertakes to refund the state in the event that the “court find that I acted in my personal capacity and own interests in the commission of [the] alleged offences” and if the State Attorney demands such a refund.
The signature looks like Zuma’s, as can be seen when comparing it to many other official signed documents available online.
.
The Mail & Guardian on Friday reported that Kemp and Hulley met this week to discuss the 16 recently reinstated corruption, money laundering and fraud charges that Zuma will probably now have to face in court.
Kemp is leading the team and reportedly met with long-time Zuma lawyer Hulley on Thursday after the latter met with Zuma on Wednesday. It is likely they will challenge the National Prosecuting Authority’s decision to resume prosecution on the basis that the original indictment against Zuma relied on a forensic report by KPMG auditor Johan van der Walt.
That report was used to build a picture of the 783 questionable payments from Zuma’s financial adviser Schabir Shaik to the then deputy president of South Africa, which Shaik was jailed for in 2005.
It’s understood, however, that the relatively recent revelations of how KPMG allegedly failed in doing auditing work of a good standard for Gupta-owned companies as well as the question marks that continue to hang over its work in compiling a report on the so-called rogue unit at the SA Revenue Service will place the auditing company’s integrity in question.
Hulley said last weekend that they were likely to go to court to take the NPA’s decision, announced by Shaun Abrahams, on review.
//
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
