Johannesburg - Judgment was reserved by the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg in the urgent interdict application by President Cyril Ramaphosa regarding his private prosecution by former president Jacob Zuma.
The matter continued sitting yesterday before a full bench of judges Selby Baqwa, Lebogang Modiba and Mohammed Ismail. It started on Wednesday.
Ramaphosa is seeking urgent relief from the court after Zuma charged him with being an accessory after the fact.
Zuma accused Ramaphosa of not acting on a complaint he lodged against State advocate Billy Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan last year and therefore sought private prosecution against the president on charges of being an accessory after the fact, relating to crimes in that case.
Ramaphosa maintained that Zuma had ulterior motives by issuing him with summons on the eve of the ANC’s 55th national conference in December last year.
The argument by the Blackhouse Kollective Foundation (friends of the court) said the National Prosecuting Authority had been shielding Ramaphosa from accountability.
Zuma’s legal team argued that the KwaZulu-Natal director of public prosecutions (DPP) delayed issuing the documents.
Advocate Elaine Zungu issued two nolle prosequi certificates last year. A nolle prosequi certificate is issued by the NPA if it declines to prosecute a case. A private individual can then go on to prosecute the case independently and at their own cost.
At the time the certificates were issued, Zuma had told the NPA he planned to prosecute Downer, but Ramaphosa’s name was not expressly mentioned in his initial complaint. Although the NPA said it would not debate the merits of the case, it said that Zungu “did not apply her mind" to whether Ramaphosa could be prosecuted by the NPA and that Ramaphosa ”was at no point a suspect“.
Zuma’s lawyer, Dali Mpofu, labelled Zungu a liar. Judge Modiba told Mpofu to “tone down” his language. Those sitting in the public gallery who were clapping in support of Mpofu’s arguments were also warned by the judges that they would be removed from the court if they did not maintain court decorum.
Ramaphosa’s lawyer, Ngwako Maenetje SC, asked where the unlawfulness is when the president acts consistently with the Constitution, and he said he acts lawfully.
"You can never convict Mr Ramaphosa for referring this complaint to the minister of justice and correctional services and the LPC (Legal Practice Council) for investigation. At best, you could get a court order to force him to make sure the minister does his job," said Maenetje.
Mpofu said any person involved in the matter should form part of the nolle prosequi certificate.
"The nolle prosequi certificate does not attach to the person; it attaches to any person who is allegedly, at least at this stage, connected to the crime," Mpofu said.
Jacob Zuma Foundation spokesperson Mzwanele Manyi took to his Twitter account earlier in the day to say Mpofu and his team made it clear that the shenanigan of counternancing the criminal court via a civil court is not allowed unless one shows special circumstances.
“The Ramaphosa legal team failed to show those circumstances. Why is it difficult for Ramaphosa’s legal team to comprehend that being an accessory after the crime, by definition, cannot be at the same time as when the crime is committed? On August 9, 2021, Section 41 was violated. Much later, Ramaphosa failed to act in the interest of justice,” Manyi said.
On Wednesday, Mpofu told the court there was nothing unreasonable about Zuma issuing a criminal summons against Ramaphosa on the eve of the ANC’s elective conference in December, as Zuma was only trying to get matters finalised before the year's end. Mpofu has maintained that Ramaphosa was always a suspect in the case.
Former ANC NEC member and Areta leader Carl Niehaus and other members of the movement protested outside the court.
The movement said they were protesting against what they called another malicious attempt by Ramaphosa to escape accountability.
The Star