Zuma must be charged by 16h00 today

Please find the DA’s full representations attached here.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) has today filed our submissions to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) arguing as to why Jacob Zuma should immediately face the 783 charges of corruption, fraud, money-laundering and racketeering in a court of law as soon as practically possible. Our submissions are in line with the NPA’s deadline for submission which is today, 30 November 2017.
Our submissions echo that which the DA has consistently stated from the get-go. That is, the charges against Jacob Zuma were irrationally dropped by the NPA in April 2009 and as such exist and are in effect. Prosecution must therefore continue without delay. However, in the unlikely event that President Zuma does in fact have materially new and relevant submissions to make, these ought to be considered by a court of law, not the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Adv Shaun Abrahams.
The submissions reiterate the following pertinent facts:

  • The decision taken by then acting NDPP, Adv Mpshe, on 29 November 2007, to prosecute Jacob Zuma stands;
  • Adv Mpshe’s later decision, announced on 6 April 2009, to discontinue prosecution, has been set aside;
  • The only basis for Adv Mpshe’s 2009 decision to discontinue prosecution was that there was improper political influence in the timing of the service of indictment on Jacob Zuma. This argument has been rejected and defeated in the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA);
  • The charges against Jacob Zuma stand, and he ought to face these charges in a court of law.

In terms of the President’s right to make representations, we note that Zuma has already been afforded the opportunity to make extensive representations which were fully considered and largely rejected. However, if there are any fresh representations submitted by the President today, the DA will not be in a position to deal with them until we have had sight of them.
Therefore we have requested the NPA shares these representations with all interested parties – including the DA – and that those interested parties are given an opportunity of 14 calendar days to comment on such representations.
Lastly, the independence and impartiality of National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) has been questionable on numerous occasions in this matter. These are set out fully in our submissions.
Therefore, we are of the view that if the President raises any new representations of substance, a court of law must make a determination as to whether those justify stopping the prosecution, or not. This is to guarantee a fair and open consideration of any new representations by the President. The most appropriate process to follow is either for the President to lay out his representations in a comprehensive application for a permanent stay of prosecution in court, or for the President to formally raise any objections in his actual criminal proceedings before court.
Yesterday marked exactly 10 years to the day that the NPA took a decision to prosecute Jacob Zuma for 783 counts of fraud, corruption, money laundering and racketeering. Since then, Zuma has used every trick in the book, and every delay tactic at his disposal to frustrate and delay the matter. But Jacob Zuma knows full well that despite this, he will have his day in court, he will face the charges for the crimes he is accused of, and justice will prevail.
The DA will not relent in our fight to ensure that our justice system works and that those who are criminally charged have their day in court. This is no different for the President.

Zuma determined to keep NPA ‘captured’ & delay facing 783 charges of corruption

President Jacob Zuma’s decision not to suspend the National Director of Public Prosecutions, Adv Shaun Abrahams, is simply explained by his determination to keep the NPA ‘captured’ and to delay him having to answer for the 783 charges of corruption, fraud, money laundering and racketeering, that stand against him.
The fact is that Adv Abrahams is comprised. His decision to prosecute Pravin Gordhan, despite having ignored vital evidence in this decision, as well as his meeting at Luthuli House, the day before Mr Gordhan was charged, proves this.
It sadly comes as no surprise that Jacob Zuma has yet again undermined what should be an ‘independent’ institution of state in his bid to avoid accountability and remain in power.
The DA will continue to pursue our case against Mr Zuma in the courts, and we look forward to the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling in this regard.
Today, we remind Jacob Zuma that we will continue to do everything possible to ensure that the principle of equality before the law is respected. His day in court is coming.