Mogomotsi Magome
PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma is set to face further pressure and calls for his removal from office following last Friday’s scathing judgment in the high court in Pretoria that set aside the decision to drop charges against him.
The court repudiated the 2009 decision by then acting National Prosecuting Authority head Mokotedi Mpshe to discontinue the prosecution of Zuma on nearly 800 charges of fraud and corruption.
The court’s ruling could not have come at a worse time for Zuma as he is facing an internal power battle within the ANC that has seen some veterans, branches and at least one provincial structure openly call for him to step down.
The calls, precipitated by the Constitutional Court ruling that found he had failed to uphold and protect the constitution, will only be strengthened by the court decision and add to the mounting reasons given against Zuma’s continued stay in office.
While the spy tapes saga may not necessarily be a major setback for Zuma and the ANC in the run-up to the local government elections, because of the local nature of the polls, inside the ANC it has handed his detractors another stick with which they can beat him and try to weaken him further heading into a difficult test for the party.
The ANC has sought to downplay the impact of the spy tape judgment on the president, but offered a less spirited defence of Zuma than it did with the Constitutional Court judgment.
ANC spokesperson Zizi Kodwa emphasised the party’s support for the rule of law, while pointing out that the ruling had not automatically reinstated the charges against Zuma nor established any guilt on his part.
“It is important to note that the court did not deal with the merits of any allegations against President Zuma, nor did it make any finding declaring guilt on any matter against President Zuma,” Kodwa said.
“(The) judgment was solely a judicial review of an administrative action taken by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) as allowed for in our law.
“We trust that it shall therefore not be used by any in our society to infer any culpability in any crime or offence by the president.”
By not explicitly instructing the NPA to reinstate the charges against Zuma – due to the separation of powers’ doctrine – the courts have placed the ball into the court of NPA boss Shawn Abrahams.
The SACP, which has become among the strongest critics of the president’s relationship with the Gupta family and the resultant “state capture” allegations, said it was still studying the judgment before adopting a position.
Some leaders across the alliance were cautious about pronouncing on the implications of the judgment, but it has become apparent that this might be one of the issues the president will have to face when the ANC leadership meets this month.
For the official opposition DA, which has pursued the matter for seven years, the hope of the impact of the spy tapes saga also includes an appeal to those inside the ANC to place more pressure on Zuma.
DA federal chairperson James Selfe conceded as much.
“I think within the ANC itself this will have profound reverberation because coming so soon after the Nkandla judgment, it does imply that Jacob Zuma is an electoral liability,” said Selfe.
When Zuma was at his weakest politically and isolated after he was fired as deputy president in 2005, the courts were partly paving the way for him to challenge from high office.
The Nicholson judgment – which was later overturned by the Supreme Court of Appeal – found there was a political conspiracy against Zuma, paving the way for the removal of Thabo Mbeki from office.
In this 2016 election year, however, the courts appear to be at the centre of his undoing, with two critical judgments this year putting the president in perhaps the most vulnerable position he has been since he assumed the leadership of the ANC at Polokwane in 2007.