Johnathan Paoli
THE South Gauteng High court has postponed the case where former President Jacob Zuma has embarked on a private prosecution of President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Zuma was in court on Thursday, following a postponement in December last year, where he accused Ramaphosa of being an accessory after the fact for allegedly failing to act against prosecutor Billy Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan, for disclosing Zuma’s medical details in violation of National Prosecuting Authority Act, he contended.
Zuma sought to keep his private prosecution case on the roll as part of his ongoing legal attempts at holding Ramaphosa accountable.
Ramaphosa successfully applied to the court last year to review and set aside Zuma’s private prosecution bid, with Zuma subsequently seeking to appeal this decision before the full bench of the High Court but lost.
Zuma petitioned the Supreme Court of Appeal, but the court dismissed his appeal; and has since requested the Appeals Court to reconsider its decision.
The SCA set aside his bid at privately prosecuting Ramaphosa stating that it has no prospects of success and that it was an abuse of court processes.
Zuma’s legal counsel Dali Mpofu insisted that this was a serious matter, and said that denying someone the right to prosecution was not a light issue.
“It’s a denial of section 34 right(s), but the bigger point for now is that this is something that should be done within a criminal court,” Mpofu said.
Ramaphosa’s legal team however said the private prosecution was not compliant with the binding statutory requirements.
“What the court did was to address each of the interests that it found to be implicated, and that on the present facts, it based on direct and/or indirect interest”.
Mpofu insisted however that there was a reasonable possibility another court could find differently, based on previous case law.
Ramaphosa’s counsel denied this possibility and said the court rightly distinguished this case, since it was based on Ramaphosa being accused as the President who failed to perform his official duty and that the state thus had a significant interest.
Speaking outside the court, Zuma called into question the hypocrisy of the legal framework surrounding him.
“A person who steals money and hides it under a mattress is allowed to contest but I am prevented from doing so,” he said.
The court postponed the matter to 6 August to allow for the prosecutor (ie. Zuma) to respond to papers filed by Ramaphosa, opposing his appeal of the Supreme Court ruling.
INSIDE POLITICS
