Former President Zuma continues to employ his infamous Stalingrad legal strategy, using every available avenue to stall the start of his arms deal corruption trial. Whether it’s seeking to privately prosecute state prosecutor Adv. Billy Downer or News24’s legal writer Karyn Maughan, it is clear Zuma will stop at nothing to thwart facing a litany of bribery, fraud, money-laundering and corruption charges. BizNews correspondent Michael Appel sat down with Accountability Now’s Adv. Paul Hoffman to peer – ever so cautiously – into the crystal ball, only to find the likelihood of even more appeals from Zuma brewing on the horizon. This while he’s currently appealing to the highest court in the land, the Constitutional Court, for a lifeline in his attempts to have Downer removed as the prosecutor on his impending case. – Michael Appel
Excerpts from interview with Accountability Now’s Adv. Paul Hoffman
Adv. Paul Hoffman on Zuma’s use of legal instruments to stall the inevitable
The the truth is that every litigant in South Africa is entitled to a fair trial. Every accused in a criminal case is entitled to the presumption of innocence. And they are entitled if the rules permit it, to take every point that presents itself to them. And that is a good thing, not a bad thing, because it’s better that 100 guilty walk free than that one innocent man is is convicted. What Zuma has been doing in this game is really taking every point in the book and inventing a whole lot of new points that have never been taken before. That’s not bad. What is bad is that the system has, in a slovenly way, accommodated the huge delays that he has brought about. You think of that image of Helen Zille and Lindiwe Mazibuko rushing to court in April 2009 to urgently review the decision of Mokotedi Mpshe not to prosecute Zuma. And you hold your breath all the way until October 2017 to actually get the outcome on appeal of that application, which was meant to be dealt with as a matter of urgency. And all that you got was the stonewalling and the Stalingrad strategy upon Stalingrad strategy. The funniest part of it all was that when it eventually got to October 2017, in the in the Supreme Court of Appeal, Zuma basically threw in the towel. He didn’t even try to fight it.
On whether there is any silver lining in what Zuma has done to stop this tactic in future
Abuse is probably too strong a word for what he is doing. This kind of tactic is designed to delay the inevitable. If the court system is managed in a way that obviates or diminishes the delays, there is less incentive to take every point in the book. So if if Mr. Zuma’s defence of the decision of Mokotedi Mpshe had been treated with the degree of urgency, because he had a choice in 2009, his choice was to go to the dock of the criminal court and face a very serious charge of being corrupted by a man who’d already been convicted for corrupting him. That was the one thing he could do. And the other thing he could do was cling to every legal point available and instead occupy the West Wing of the Union buildings. No surprises he preferred not to be in the dock.
On the upcoming private prosecution of Downer and Maughan
Adv. Wim Trengove is going to be arguing that this is a pony that doesn’t run and that the court should just put it out of its misery and as it has broken leg or two already. Karyn Maughan will also be using that occasion to bowl Zuma out. I’m very interested to hear why Zuma thinks that she can be privately prosecuted without bothering to get a nolle prosequi certificate against her. That is a complete mystery to me as to why that should be allowed. He got an nolle prosequi certificate certificate from the National Director of Public Prosecutions, basically saying the NPA did not want to prosecute Billy Downer. And we certify that that is the case, which is a necessary preliminary step in a private prosecution. They didn’t bother to do it with Karyn Maughan, so I don’t really know where they’re going with it.
On whether Zuma can appeal the private prosecution outcome if he’s unsuccessful
Yes, he can. He can appeal it, which is why I’ve made a case in this interview for proper case management so that there are not huge delays along the way. It is scandalous that that it took from 2009 to 2017 to get to the point where the decision [not to prosecute Zuma] was overturned. But it did happen. And that shows that the system is still intact, even if it is creaking rather slowly.
On whether Zuma will find yet another avenue to launch legal challenges against even if Downer was removed as prosecutor
He’ll say that Mr. Downer has worked too long, too closely with whichever substitute is chosen and that this is just Mr. Downer in drag as it were. I think the NPA is perfectly correct to stand by Downer and to not relieve him of his brief or his task on the Zuma case. Because once you create bad precedents by kowtowing to this kind of nonsensical application, you’re just simply signing an open certificate to the next man to try the same trick.
Read also:
- Karyn Maughan prosecution branded ‘intimidation’ and ‘attack on media freedom’
- From Russia with very expensive love – Karyn Maughan on SA’s bombed nuclear deal
- JZ’s private prosecution of Downer and Maughan set for Feb 2023
