Zuma lied under oath about NPA exit, says Nxasana
Former national director of public prosecutions Mxolisi Nxasana is the third public official in a month who has declared that the court testimony by senior leaders of government is false.
In an affidavit filed in the High Court in Pretoria last week, Nxasana said President Jacob Zuma’s statement that the former director had requested to be removed from his post under the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act was “false”.
He explained that he only entered a settlement agreement to leave his post after Zuma decided to institute a commission of inquiry into his fitness to hold office and because his attempts to deal with problems within the prosecuting authority were blocked.
Nxasana’s affidavit comes in the wake of affidavits filed by South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) CEO Thokozani Magwaza and former directorgeneral of social development Zane Dangor contesting the allegations made by Social Minister Bathabile Dlamini in an affidavit to the Constitutional Court that her attempts to find a solution to the grants payments crisis were stymied by Magwaza and Sassa officials.
Nxasana’s affidavit was filed in the application brought by Corruption Watch, Freedom Under Law and the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution against Zuma, Justice Minister Michael Masutha and six other respondents to have the R17.3m settlement agreement which led to Nxasana’s departure set aside as well as the appointment of his successor, Shaun Abrahams.
The organisations also want the court to declare that Nxasana is still the national director of public prosecutions and that the president has no constitutional power to appoint, suspend or remove the incumbent.
They argue that the settlement agreement and the decision to authorise it were unlawful and unconstitutional and should be declared invalid.
In his affidavit, Nxasana told the court he did not oppose the application and would abide by the decision of the court, including an order that he repay the R17.3m. He stressed that on several occasions, he had informed Zuma and Masutha that he did not want to leave office whereas Zuma insisted in his affidavit that “Nxasana made the request to me to vacate his office”.
The NPA provides for such a request to be made.
“The allegation that I requested to vacate my office cannot be sustained,” Nxasana said.
Nxasana’s submission to the court also stated that after the court application had been lodged, Zuma’s legal adviser, Michael Hulley, proposed that he should work with the president on the case and offered to pay his legal costs.
“It was evident to me that Mr Hulley wanted me to say on oath that I had made a request to the president to vacate my office in terms of section 12(8) of the NPA Act. I advised Mr Hulley that I was not prepared to make that statement since that was not what had occurred factually. I reminded him that I was an officer of this court and that I would not mislead the court.”
In his affidavit, Nxasana also said his leadership at the NPA was resisted by its deputy head, Nomgcobo Jiba, and the head of the commercial crime unit, Lawrence Mrwebi — both of whom have since been struck off the roll of advocates — and that they sought to undermine his standing with Zuma.
Nxasana alleged Jiba and Mrwebi told Zuma that he intended to reinstate criminal charges against him and stirred discontent about Nxasana among NPA staff members.