South Africa


Zuma granted adjournment of fraud and corruption trial to next month

Zuma granted adjournment of fraud and corruption trial to next month
Former president Jacob Zuma in the dock at the Pietermaritzburg High Court. He faces corruption, fraud, money laundering, racketeering and tax-evasion charges. (Photo: Sandile Ndlovu)

Imprisoned former President Jacob Zuma was linked up at the Estcourt Prison via Microsoft Teams when Judge Piet Koen delivered a ruling to postpone the fraud and corruption case in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on Tuesday.

Judge Piet Koen agreed to postpone the Arms Deal graft trial, for which Zuma’s legal team had argued on Monday.

Without offering the reasons for his decision, Koen said the matter was adjourned to 10 to 13 August, for the hearing of Zuma’s special plea.

Zuma heard the decision via audio link from the Estcourt Correctional Centre.

During the brief  virtual sitting on Tuesday morning,  Koen told the parties at the start that the prison’s audio link had been experiencing technical difficulties. Only Zuma’s audio link was working as the judge read out his orders. 

Koen’s directive that proceedings continue virtually, however, stands, although he has allowed for parties to submit in writing their reasons for and against this, meaning he is still open to changing the directive. 

“The parties and correctional services are each invited to provide a list, in point form, and not exceeding two pages of double-space typing, of any considerations, and/or prejudice, which might result, which they consider relevant to the decision whether the directive should be revoked or revised,” read Koen.  

“The list of considerations and possible prejudice… must be compiled with reference to the circumstances that will prevail, or are anticipated to prevail, as from 9 August 2021. 

“The lists referred to… must be transmitted to the judges registrar on or before 2 August 2021, via email. The registrar then has to send this via email to the head of the correctional facility at Estcourt. 

“Any revision of the directive or the revocation thereof shall be communicated to the parties by email, on 4 August, 2021.” 

KwaZulu-Natal has been on tenterhooks for the past 10 days as the civil unrest that led to the death of hundreds of citizens – most of them looters – and billions in damages gripped parts of the province during adjusted Level 4 lockdown. Koen’s ruling may not be liked, but under the circumstances it is a safe one. 

The South African National Defence Force and police have been stationed in their numbers outside the courthouse, as calls have been circulating on social media for pro-Zuma protesters to gather at the facility – even though proceedings have been conducted virtually. Those calls have, however, come to naught.

The province itself, though, and particularly eThekwini and swathes of Pietermaritzburg, is blanketed in anxiety as a possible “second wave” of violence is being anticipated and planned for by authorities and communities. State infrastructure, including courthouses, is being guarded and judges have been told to be vigilant.  

Police choppers are still patrolling the skies, looking for flare-ups. 

In his arguments for the postponement on Monday, Zuma’s lawyer Dali Mpofu insisted that his client’s constitutional rights to a fair trial would be violated should he not be allowed to physically be at proceedings for his special plea. 

Zuma is using the special plea, in terms of Section 106 (1) (h) of the Criminal Procedure Act, to try to remove veteran prosecutor Billy Downer from the trial, on the grounds that, among other things, he “wittingly or unwittingly turned the prosecution into a personal legacy project of his own rather than a pursuit for justice based on an impartial and independent mind”.

The former president believes that should he be successful in his special plea, he will be entitled to an acquittal. 

Mpofu and fellow senior counsel Thabani Masuku told Koen on Monday that postponements were common in trial proceedings, and that anything else could be seen as the judge not treating Zuma “like everyone else”. 

They needed to consult with their client during proceedings, argued Mpofu, which would only be possible if he was present “in person”. 

Appearing for the State, advocate Wim Trengove, SC, said the application for postponement should be dismissed, and proceedings should continue. 

“There is a duty on the State to prosecute corruption, and in particular public officials accused of corruption,” said Trengove. 

He said Zuma had for “more than 10 years” been “desperately [seeking] to avoid answering the charges of corruption, fraud and money laundering [he is facing]”.

Judge Piet Koen granted former president Jacob Zuma’s application to postpone his corruption trial to 10 august 2021. (Photo: Screengrab)

The former president has been incarcerated since handing himself over to authorities in the early hours of 8 July for being in contempt of a Constitutional Court order that he testify at the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture. 

He was sentenced to 15 months’ direct imprisonment as a result of the contempt charge. His application for rescission was heard by the same court last Monday when judgment was reserved.

Regarding the Arms Deal trial, Zuma is accused of receiving 791 payments, totalling R4.1-million, between 1995 and 2004 from his former financial/economic adviser Schabir Shaik and Shaik’s companies, to help Thales (accused number two) secure lucrative defence contracts from the government as part of the country’s multibillion-rand 1999 armaments deal.

 Downer was part of the original team that secured Shaik’s conviction in 2005.

 Zuma faces one count of racketeering, two counts of corruption, one count of money laundering and 12 counts of fraud. 

Thales is facing one count of racketeering, two counts of corruption and one count of money laundering.

 Zuma has pleaded not guilty to all charges. DM


Comments - Please in order to comment.

  • Nick Griffon says:

    Dali Mpofu’s arguments are absolutely absurd. He should be dealt with a personal cost order for wasting the court’s time and then one could also begin to argue a case of “defeating the ends of justice” if they continue with their shenanigans.

    • Gerrie Pretorius Pretorius says:

      That would only happen in Lalaland Nick, never here in the (Banana) Republic of (anc) SA.

      • Bradley Harber says:

        That is an unfair comment. The courts have in a number of recent high profile cases involving questionable conduct displayed by a litigant been very quick to register their discontent through punitive costs orders and scathing judgments (see for example a number of the matters involving the public protector). Tainting the judiciary with this overused, tired and annoying ‘banana republic’ rhetoric is frankly a lazy, ignorant cheap shot, demonstrating either an inability or refusal to recognise that the courts are neither beholden to the whims of the ANC or any political party nor should they be assessed on anything other than their conduct (independently of any assessment of the government’s performance). I challenge you to come up with one example which substantiates your comment.

        Criticising the courts based purely on your view of the ANC – and in a dismissive, somewhat patronising tone as thought your view is one which is generally accepted to be correct – is misguided at best. Sadly, this appears to be the trend. One would have thought that anyone who cares for the country would want to be absolutely sure that any negativity they disseminate is both constructive and justified, otherwise what good does it do?

    • SAM VAN WYK says:

      The problem is that a white judge was assigned to the case, he has to tread very carefully, and this plays into the hands of the Zuma camp. Assigning a white judge to such racially charged case is ridiculous!

      • Bradley Harber says:

        It is remarkable that such a short comment can contain so many alarming statements. Of course it would have been longer if you had thought to substantiate any of them (or perhaps shorter or non-existent once you realised that nothing you say is defensible). Why is the race of a judge of any relevance, generally speaking? Why must he ‘tread carefully’? Why would a non-white judge be able to be less cautious? I am also interested in what makes you say this is a ‘racially charged case’. I think you are projecting your own insecurities and biases onto the judge while at the same time attacking his integrity. The ‘problem’ is not what you believe it to be, it is your assumption (as a generalisation) that in certain circumstances a judge’s impartiality and integrity is capable of being called into question solely due to the colour of their skin.

  • Johan Buys says:


  • Coen Gous says:

    A White judge overseeing this trial. He has no chance whatsoever, and will simply have to go along with this continuous farce. It won’t stop, and the State Capture cases have not even started yet. Zuma will remain “King of the Zuly’s, King of the ANC, and King of the country”.

  • John Gosling says:

    This is where the firm stand of the judiciary starts to come into question. The reasons for requesting this postponement are so absurd that I thought the judge would simply proceed and dismiss the request – instead he conceded! Very troubling. What on earth guarantees that Zuma will be able to appear in person at the next hearing – he OUGHT to still be in prison! Am I missing some important aspect of the case here?

  • Derek Hebbert says:

    Another postponement giving Zuma and his team time to scheme up another delaying tactic.
    More tax payers money wasted.

  • Chris Green says:

    A Luta Continua !!! If I had suggested this even just 2 weeks ago, this DM community would correctly have laughed it off as the ravings of a ….. However, the “IRREVELANCE Quotient” of Zuma, his sons / family has started to gain significance, his slide into ignominy is gathering momentum and, if we can get the media to STOP giving them a platform through which to perpetuate their “story”, the speed of both will increase to the advantage of every real South African.

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options