Former President Jacob Zuma at the Gauteng High Court on Thursday. PHOTO: Bongekile Macupé/Noticias24
- Lawyers for former president Jacob Zuma told the High Court that he could not “take the chance” of having his private prosecution against President Cyril Ramaphosa removed from the court’s list.
- Zuma wants to appeal a provisional order that prevents him from proceeding with the private prosecution pending a review by Ramaphosa.
- Judge Ismail Mohamed set the private indictment for May 26.
Former President Jacob Zuma had to appear in court on Thursday over the private impeachment he instituted against President Cyril Ramaphosa to prevent it from being dropped or dismissed.
This was the presentation made by Zuma’s lawyer, Dali Mpofu, SC, before Judge Ismail Mohamed at the Gauteng High Court, where Zuma sought a date for the private indictment.
On Monday, a full bench of the High Court barred Zuma from pursuing his case against Ramaphosa, pending the president’s request to invalidate the private indictment as an abuse of due process.
On Wednesday, Superior Court Judge Roland Sutherland set Ramaphosa’s request for review for May 17-18.
READ | Six failed arguments: how the High Court dismantled Zuma’s efforts to compel Ramaphosa to appear in court
Although Monday’s order meant Ramaphosa was not required to appear in court on Thursday for the private prosecution.
However, this was not the case for Zuma.
Mpofu argued that, in terms of the Criminal Procedure Law, if the private accuser – in this case, Zuma – does not physically appear on the day the matter is in court, the charges against the defendant should be dismissed unless they are present to the court reasons for the non-appearance of the private prosecutor. If the ruling was beyond the control of the private prosecutor, the court may stay or postpone the proceeding to a later date.
added:
So it’s that last part that really brings us to your honor for the court to stay or postpone the case to a later date.
Zuma could not take the “risk,” he said, that the matter would be dropped or dismissed because “we can’t get it back.”
Mpofu also argued that they disagreed with Ramaphosa’s interpretation that Monday’s order exempted him from appearing in court on Thursday.
“We have a different interpretation, but that is not an issue your honor needs to be concerned with today,” he said.
The private prosecution case was postponed until May 26.
Appeal
Mpofu also told the court that Zuma had instructed his lawyers to appeal Monday’s order.
However, he added that they were still deciding whether to appeal directly to the Constitutional Court or to approach the Supreme Court of Appeals.
With Part B of the petition scheduled to be heard on May 17 and 18, it is unclear what Zuma will appeal.
Jacob Zuma Foundation spokesman Mzwanele Manyi took pains to explain to the media what Zuma intended to appeal.
“We are appealing the injunction. We are appealing the non-presence of the defendant (Ramaphosa),” he said.
HOW IT HAPPENED | Zuma vs Ramaphosa postponed until May 26
He added that the foundation will also issue a statement explaining the basis of the appeal.
“There are too many things the Bank got wrong, and lawyers will point them all out,” Manyi said.
Jacob Zuma Foundation spokesman Mzwanele Manyi has also just arrived in court and has confirmed that the former president is on his way.
This despite the fact that the registrar has said there is no court paper issue involving Zuma.@News 24 @TeamNews24 pic.twitter.com/wxZhie8xWk— Bongekile Macupe (@BongeMacupe) January 19, 2023
No case on the court list
Before the court proceedings began, there was confusion as to whether the matter would proceed because it was not on the court record.
Chief Clerk Roanne Bramdaw told reporters there were no Zuma-related matters on the court list due to Monday’s trial.
But Mohamed said that he was not informed about the matter and only found out in the morning.
