The Electoral Court is expected to deliver judgment on Wednesday on whether former president Jacob Zuma should be included on the list of candidates to Parliament following an application by his party objecting to his removal.
The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party lodged an application opposing the removal of Zuma from the list because of his conviction and sentence by the Constitutional Court for defying its order.
Judge Dumisani Zondi said the court will deliver the judgment today, to stick to the timetable of the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC), to make a decision on objections made against candidates contesting for seats in Parliament.
The commission squared off the with MK Party yesterday, where they argued over the removal of Zuma from the list of candidates.
Advocate Thembeka Ngcukaitobi SC, for the IEC, said it was clear from case law that contempt of court is described as a crime.
"Contempt is referred to as a crime or as an offence," he said in reference to other cases.
"People are only convicted of crimes. The procedure for the conviction has no bearing on whether they have been convicted or not. What we know is that for contempt is that the procedure is hybrid. In the judgment of Justice Khampepe in the Zuma contempt case is that what she said is that it is a hybrid - part criminal and part civil."
In this particular case, we only have to look at the judgment, it states that Mr Zuma is "guilty of the crime of contempt", that is a conviction.
"So we are dealing with someone who is a convict, who has been convicted of an offence."
He further argued that the drafters of the Constitution were clear when they crafted a section that barred people who have been sentenced to more than 12 months in prison.
Ngcukaitobi said law breakers could not be allowed to be lawmakers.
“Mr Zuma is one of the people precluded by the Constitution and that will never change,” said Ngcukaitobi.
But MK Party counsel, advocate Dali Mpofu SC, argued
He added that the IEC had no authority to disqualify Zuma from being on the list of candidates for Parliament.
He said that authority lied with the National Assembly.
Mpofu argued that they were dealing with a serious matter that sought to disenfranchise millions of voters who wanted to vote for a candidate of their choice.
Mpofu said Zuma was convicted and sentenced by the Constitutional Court without being allowed to appeal.
“We all know there was no trial, no plea. Zuma was the only person who sat in court without pleading guilty or not,” he said.
Zuma’s sentence was reduced after he was granted a remission of sentence by President Cyril Ramaphosa, when he made an announcement on thousands of prisoners who were granted remission.
Mpofu said what has brought them to court was interpretation of section 47 of the Constitution, which dealt with the membership of the National Assembly.
“It is about the interpretation of Section 47. It is about whether the administration of section 47 lies with the IEC,” said Mpofu.
“That is where we are. Section 47 deals with the membership of the National Assembly. The section reminds us of Section 19, that every citizen who qualifies to vote, including Zuma is eligible to be a member of the National Assembly.
“The IEC must tell this court where it gets the authority to implement Section 47. The answer is nowhere. The only power of the IEC is found in section 190 of the Constitution. It says the commission must manage elections, ensure the elections are free and fair and declare the results.”
He argued that the National Assembly was entrusted with the powers to manage its own affairs, However, the judiciary cannot get involved in it, let alone the IEC.
Outside court, scores of uMkhonto weSizwe Party supporters braved the rainy and chilly weather to show their support to Zuma, who attended court yesterday.
Chanting “Wenzeni Zuma” and other Struggle songs, the party hopefuls were adamant that Zuma will be on the ballot come May 29.
Addressing his supporters outside court, Zuma said he was not allowed to finish his term of office.
“I never got to finish my second term. They forget that I was removed. I still have an unfinished business with Parliament. I want to return there. Beyond that, I have never heard of a situation where one is not allowed to lead a party he has formed,” he said.
The Star