Zuma allowed to dispute ruling on defence costs

As former president Jacob Zuma prepares to finally face the state’s 15-year-old corruption prosecution against him, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) has agreed to hear his challenge to a judgment that cut government funding of his defence costs.

On Tuesday, the SCA ordered that Zuma’s lawyers be allowed to argue his challenge to the Pretoria high court’s ruling that he was not entitled to continue receiving government sponsorship of his corruption trial legal costs. The high court had also ordered that Zuma repay the more than R16m already spent by the state on his defence costs.

This appeal has major implications for Zuma’s ability to defend himself during his trial, which the state says is based on detailed forensic evidence about his finances and payments he received from multiple benefactors, including former financial adviser Schabir Shaik. It also sets a precedent for state funding of officials accused of corruption.

It is unclear at this point whether Zuma’s lawyers will ask that his trial be delayed until his funding appeal is finalised.

In December 2018, a full bench of the Pretoria high court overturned a 2006 agreement Zuma signed with former president Thabo Mbeki for state funding of his fees, with the understanding that he would repay that money if he was convicted. The state paid for former police commissioner Jackie Selebi’s legal costs in his corruption trial but never sought to recover the millions spent on the case after his conviction.

“It is declared the state is not liable for the legal costs incurred by Mr Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma in his personal capacity in criminal prosecutions instituted against him, in any civil litigation related or incidental thereto, or any other associated legal costs,” deputy judge president Aubrey Ledwaba said at the time.

In papers lodged at the SCA, Zuma argued that he is entitled to continued legal funding from the state under the provisions of the State Attorney Act, as the crimes he stands accused of were allegedly committed in the course of his official duties.

It is the state’s case that Zuma received more than R4m in corrupt benefits from Shaik and that he accepted a R500,000 a year bribe from French arms company Thales.

The SCA has also agreed to hear Zuma’s challenge to the Pretoria high court’s ruling that he should be held personally liable for about R10m in legal costs linked in his failed efforts to interdict and review then public protector Thuli Madonsela’s State of Capture report.

IN 2018, A FULL BENCH OF THE PRETORIA HIGH COURT OVERTURNED A 2006 AGREEMENT ZUMA SIGNED WITH THABO MBEKI