Port Elizabeth - South African taxpayers have footed the bill of almost R10 million for President Jacob Zuma’s legal fees and exorbitant legal counsel, the Democratic Alliance said on Saturday.
“Our research reveals that since 2009 President Zuma has spent an inordinate amount of taxpayers’ money on keeping himself from facing justice. This is despite there being no basic services for the millions of South Africans who so deserve them, DA federal executive chairman James Selfe told reporters at a press conference in Port Elizabeth.
Specifically, since November 2013, this included advocate’s fees of R4 795 000; attorney’s fees of R400 000; correspondence fees, etc of R300,000; administration fees of R4000; and cost orders of R1 200 000, among others.
“This is the hallmark of frivolous expenditure for one man. This is set to rise since the president and his cronies at the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) take this matter to the Constitutional Court. This is indicative of how much the ANC state has become preoccupied with protecting President Zuma and that alone,” Selfe said.
“Throughout my time in Parliament I have watched the ANC become a shadow of itself and a shadow of what it was supposed to be. The truth is that the ANC has changed and done so for the worse. The truth is that the ANC has done so for President Zuma who faces 783 charges.”
This was also true of the Cabinet and the ministers he had appointed to do his bidding. Reports released earlier this year revealed that government departments - at the behest of ministers and directors general - entered into and proceeded with costly litigation despite senior legal advice that these cases were without any legal merit and were sure to be thrown out by the courts.
This sort of frivolous litigation had played out in the courts time and time again. Most notable was Zuma’s defence of the Nkandla matter which ended in concession on the steps of the Constitutional Court with a massive team of five advocates for Zuma alone. Another such example was the Booysen matter where the state had lost more than five times in trying to get rid of the KwaZulu-Natal Hawks head Johann Booysen on baseless claims.
This was also true of the litigation around the suitability of Hlaudi Motsoeneng to be the chief operating officer of the SABC, which had involved the DA in four separate court cases. Subsequent events at Auckland Park had shown how justified the DA was in seeking his removal.
“It is easy for the state to pursue litigation using other peoples’ money. It is our contention that the ministers and directors general should be held liable and be made to pay personally for these exercises in wasting valuable financial resources,” Selfe said.
This investigation vindicated the DA’s long-held position that the decision to drop the 783 corruption charges against Zuma was indeed distinctly irrational and that it was not based in any cogent logic or law.
The truth was, despite what Zuma said, the record of decision revealed that the then acting national director of prosecutions (NDPP) Mokotedi Mpshe did not make his decision based on an assessment that his earlier decision to institute criminal proceedings against Zuma was flawed.
He did not make his decision based on any new information, and did not make his decision based on any substantive content of the indictment containing the charges or on concerns about the prosecuting team.
“In the absence of any legitimate factual or legal reasons, the DA is led to believe that these charges were dropped to serve a political agenda. It would have been for President Zuma to argue that he was being prosecuted for malicious political reasons and for a competent court to decide on the merits of such representations. It was not for the NPA, acting at the president’s behest, to simply drop the charges without legal basis,” Selfe said.
African News Agency