South Africa

DAYS OF ZONDO

Jacob Zuma out of runway as Judge Zondo gives thumbs-up to state capture inquiry summons

Former South African president Jacob Zuma. (Photo: EPA-EFE/PHIL MAGAKOE / POOL)

Former president Jacob Zuma is unlikely to appear on 16 November as his team plans an application for recusal of Judge Raymond Zondo.

After giving the State Capture Commission of Inquiry the runaround for two years, the rubber hit the road for former president Jacob Zuma when chairperson Judge Raymond Zondo authorised the legal team to issue summons to compel him to appear from 16 November to 20 November 2020. 

On Friday 9 October  at 10.31, Zondo said: “I am satisfied that a proper case has been made for the commission secretary to sign and issue a summons for Mr Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma to appear before the commission at 10am from November 16th to November 20th.”  The judge made provision for Zuma to give testimony electronically from his home at Nkandla as he used his age as a factor for Covid-19 transmission and a reason for not attending the commission in September 2020.  The commission must stop hearing testimony in December so Zondo can write his report before the state capture probe wraps up in 2021. 

But Zuma is unlikely to accede as his team plans to launch an application before the commission for Zondo to recuse himself. If the judge refuses, Zuma’s team intends to make a Gauteng High Court petition to compel him to do so. His legal team believes that once a recusal application is triggered, Zuma can’t be compelled to appear before the commission. 

“Thirty-four witnesses have implicated Mr Zuma,” said the commission’s legal head, Advocate Paul Pretorius, as he argued for a summons to be granted, adding: “There’s a duty at common law that obliges the commission to call Mr Zuma to answer. This commission has issued over 2,500 summonses, of which 99 were issued for witnesses to appear. It’s a necessary mechanism for this commission to do its work.”

Pretorius said Zuma’s testimony was crucial because he is named in four direct terms of reference of the commission and in two indirect terms – he is a marquee witness to understand state capture. “Mr Zuma’s evidence is necessary and desirable for the work of the commission. Much, if not most, of the acts of state capture occurred during his term of office,” said Pretorius.

Zondo has resisted summoning Zuma despite the former president leading the commission on a merry dance. 

He has been asked to provide his version of events since 13 September 2018 after former GCIS CEO Themba Maseko testified to influence-peddling by him on behalf of the Gupta family who wanted the government advertiser to place campaigns in their media outlets. In April 2019, he was invited to respond to various testimonies which had implicated him and he appeared in July 2019. 

In that three-day appearance in July, he failed to answer any substantive questions but chose to give testimony of various alleged long-standing conspiracies against him. Zuma said then that he was withdrawing from any participation in the commission, but after an agreement was struck in Zondo’s chambers, his team agreed to stay in. 

Long road to a summons

After the July 2019 agreement, the commission repeatedly wrote to Zuma’s legal team requesting his affidavit (in response to verbal claims he made about broadcaster Redi Tlhabi), seeking to set up three further appearances and requesting his version to dozens of implicating testimonies. Zuma cited first his arms deal trial and later an illness not to appear and in January 2020, the commission’s legal team drew up a preliminary summons application which Zondo again kicked into touch, preferring negotiation over confrontation.

By September, Zondo began to run out of patience: “…they (Zuma’s counsel) had construed it would be dates agreed with them and I made it clear that I decide dates”.

On Friday 9 October, the judge was strained but determined: he ruminated aloud on several occasions about testimony he had heard implicating Zuma (the axing of former finance minister Nhlanhla Nene, the attempt by the Gupta family to bribe former deputy finance minister Mcebisi Jonas, various Eskom testimony alleging meddling by Zuma) and how he would struggle to do his job without the former head of state’s testimony.

“All these things can’t be ignored. I can’t ignore those things if I am to do my job,” said Zondo at one point in the summons application hearing. 

Later, he said:

“If, on the information available to me, there can be no doubt that if I form a view that a particular person may have or does have knowledge of matters relevant to my investigations, I must take steps to get that person to come testify. If I don’t do that, I will be failing in my duty.” 

To which Pretorius replied, “There is an election not to answer by a witness but there is no right not to come to a commission at all.”

Zuma’s legal team is preparing an application to get Zondo to recuse himself and once this is launched, they believe this will place the summons in legal abeyance. 

It’s going to be an ugly fight as the former president intends to raise his previous personal relationship with the judge as one of the factors for recusal.

In a four-page letter addressed to Zondo in September, Zuma’s lawyer, Eric Mabuza, accused the judge of bias and a lack of partiality; he wrote that the former president had doubts about the legality of the commission even though he appointed it and signed it into life. 

Raising a spectre of arguments to come, the letter to Zondo states: 

“President Zuma believes that the source of the Chairperson’s bias against him stems from the fact that the President and the Chairperson have historical personal, family and professional relations that ought to have been publicly disclosed by the Chairperson before accepting his appointment.” DM

Gallery

Comments - share your knowledge and experience

Please note you must be a Maverick Insider to comment. Sign up here or sign in if you are already an Insider.

Everybody has an opinion but not everyone has the knowledge and the experience to contribute meaningfully to a discussion. That’s what we want from our members. Help us learn with your expertise and insights on articles that we publish. We encourage different, respectful viewpoints to further our understanding of the world. View our comments policy here.

All Comments 14

  • Yeh, well, here we go again. The biggest criminal in this country, certainly since 1992, will never see the inside of a jail. And that will have a knock-on effect on other political criminals. That reminds me of the last motion of no confidence in Zuma, some 4 years ago, in parlement. Just prior to the voting, Gwede Matashe, the then Secretary-General of the ANC, speaking to the media, made the following statement: “We will not vote against Zuma, no ANC member will!” And only few did. May that decision haunts him, and all of them, for the rest of their lives, as it resulted in another 1-2 odd years of Zuma dominance, corruption, money laundering, and fraud. That has set a permanent trend, of each and sundry of ANC members participating in such behaviour, and SA will never escape that. Not in my lifetime in any case

  • Why did Zuma appoint Zondo if there was a personal relationship and history that Zondo should have disclosed prior to his appointment?

    • Exactly. Or perhaps he specially kept that in his “back pocket” to use when the time was right. I doubt the law would agree with that though, but it allows Zuma to delay testifying before Zondo has to finish.

  • Almost all accused plead not guilty in normal courts. If a person refuses to take the stand, or denies, or “forgot” everything, then I would imagine that as in a normal court, the judge can reach conclusions based on the credibility of the evidence that WAS given. At the end of the day EVERYBODY KNOWS that Zuma was hopelessly corrupt and that is how history will record his life, regardless of what Zondo can record as a finding or the prison that was never ever going to happen in any event. It is a lot like Jooste. He does not need to be found guilty in a court : everybody knows.

    • Hi Johan. You are so right. But millions, if fact the total population, have suffered because of that. The country got poorer, state institutions, like Eskom, collapsed. We will pay for that our entire lifetime. And Jooste will still chase his nude mistress on her white horse, living the high life, and Zuma will still waste tax payers money, accumulate wives and children. Knowing they are guilty without paying for their crimes certainly does not make me feel better. To the contrary, it makes me more bitter, as a part of my life was taken away, as is the case with every single citizen, except those in the ANC, and Jooste’s inner circle, that received a benefit from these crimes

  • Don’t bet on it (Zuma running out of runway).

    He will be dead and buried way prior to this pointless and hugely expensive little circus closes its doors.

  • Is it possible that Trump is getting/taking lessons from Zuma ? Wonder how much Trump is paying him for his ‘trailblazing’ role ?