Former President Jacob Zuma.
- The Constitutional Court has dismissed the latest attempt by former President Jacob Zuma to force the removal of his prosecutor Billy Downer.
- While this means that Zuma’s long-awaited Arms Deal case could go ahead, Zuma could file a legal challenge to block his trial from continuing.
- Zuma is currently seeking to privately prosecute Downer and this writer for alleged violations of the National Revenue Authority Act.
The Constitutional Court has unanimously dismissed the latest attempt by former president Jacob Zuma to force the removal of his prosecutor Billy Downer through a so-called “special plea” process, which the former president says would entitle him to an acquittal.
This means, possibly, that Zuma’s long-awaited Arms Deal case could go ahead, unless he files another legal challenge to stop his trial from proceeding.
And that seems likely, as Zuma is currently seeking to privately prosecute Downer and this writer for alleged violations of the National Prosecution Authority Act in a separate case relating to News24’s publication of court documents containing a sick note from one of the former president’s military doctors.
READ | EXPLANATION: Zuma vs. Downer and Maughan: Everything you need to know
Zuma has asked, in separate arguments before Pietermaritzburg High Court Judge Piet Koen, that Downer be removed as his prosecutor because of this.
In response, Koen noted that he had previously addressed the issue of Zuma’s criminal complaint against Downer in his ruling on his “special plea” request, and asked for defense and state presentations on whether he should resign as judge. judge as a result.
The judge will issue his decision on his possible challenge on January 30, 2023.
In his application to the ConCourt, Zuma had argued that if the high court finds that Downer lacks the title to prosecute him, “then he would be entitled to seek an acquittal.”
“The implications of this request and/or appeal for my rights are therefore far-reaching.”
However, Downer had stated in court documents that Zuma’s special statement “lacks a valid legal basis and that there is no plausible factual basis for his allegations that I misbehaved and am guilty of criminal misconduct in connection with his prosecution.” “.
Counsel argued that the court was correct in holding that the issue of determination raised by the special statement was Zuma’s contention that he has no right to sue under section 106(1)(7) of the PCA, and nothing more.
READ | How Zuma went from not sick, hospitalized for a routine checkup, to medical parole
“The fact that Mr. Zuma wrongly invoked alleged violations of his right to a fair trial in support of his special pleading does not detract from the fact that his special pleading was based on the allegation that I lack the right to prosecute as provided for in section 106(1)(h), and nothing more,” the prosecutor said.
He also stated that there was no prospect of success for the high court to interfere on appeal with the High Court’s special guilty plea decision.
Zuma argued that the issue, arising from the allegations of prosecutorial misconduct raised by the special statement, is whether he would receive a fair trial if Downer is the lead prosecutor, but Downer said the court will better determine whether the former president has received a fair trial.
Downer said in court documents that the criminal trial had already been unreasonably delayed and that adding any further delay would “harm the interest of the general public.”
