Court reports: Zuma was subject of media smear campaign

Charl du Plessis, City Press

Pretoria – President Jacob Zuma was the subject of a smear campaign in the media because he had become the “unacceptable face of Africa” and it is a “myth” for the DA to claim that Zuma desperately wanted a day in court.

South Africa's President and leader of the ruling ANC party Jacob Zuma (C) greets his supporters as he arrives for the launch of his party's election manifesto at Mbombela stadium in Nelspruit January 11, 2014. REUTERS/Ihsaan Haffejee

This is according to an explosive affidavit filed by Zuma’s lawyer, Michael Hulley, in the so called spy tapes case in which he calls the DA’s attempt to review the NPA’s decision to drop corruption charges against Zuma “fatally and deeply flawed”.

In Hulley’s affidavit he argues that the DA’s case assumes that the decision to drop corruption charges against Zuma was based solely on the spy tapes when it was actually based on Zuma’s representations to the NPA as to why charges against him should be dropped.


“The tapes must be considered in their context and their place in the representations.”

Hulley argues that the DA have accepted that these representations are confidential and that the fact that they did not challenge this confidentially is fatal to their case.

Hulley mentions the Browse Mole report, delays in the prosecution and press leakages designed to denigrate the president, which all overwhelmingly support former acting NPA head Mokotedi Mpshe’s decision to drop corruption charges against Zuma.

“He [Zuma] had a very distinguished record in the service of the ANC, he was however regarded by many as the unacceptable face of Africa and by 2002, the [Thabo] Mbeki faction [supporters of the then president] were determined that Zuma should not become the president of the ANC or of the RSA.”

Hulley goes on to record that Zuma was convinced that leaks came from the office of the Scorpions.

Day in court

Hulley also argues that the DA “makes unsubstantiated general assumptions in their case” such as the fact that Zuma wants a day in court to clear his name.

“The myth that Zuma desperately wants to be charged has become a mantra of the anti-Zuma camps and the DA. That contention is certainly not based on any fact postdating 2003.”

Hulley later explains that while Zuma did challenge the NPA to prosecute him in 2003 he was much younger then and did not want to go into the Polokwane conference with charges hanging over his head.

Hulley also dismisses as “quite untenable” the DA’s attempt to argue that the prosecutors responsible for Zuma’s case were not involved in the manipulation of the criminal prosecution.

“It is very easy to be self-righteous as an individual who cannot even begin to see himself in the position of the accused. From an accused’s perspective, he is confronted by the NPA and an NPA intent on his conviction. It is no solace that some individuals may have been blameless or even fair”.

Hulley argues the former Scorpions head Leonard McCarthy was a powerful individual who played a pivotal and powerful role in Zuma’s prosecution, not just a trivial actor.

“His trivial interferences would have had Mbeki as a leader of the ANC and most likely a puppet president of the RSA installed.”


(Visited 10 times, 1 visits today)