Save SA wants judicial inquiry

State capture: Lobby calls for swift action

What we need is action to stop it,” it added.

“It is clear that there should only be one thing on the ANC leadership’s mind this weekend: taking Jacob Zuma down before he takes the entire country – and the ANC – down with him.”

The ruling party’s top leadership is meeting in Irene from yesterday.

President Jacob Zuma via the Office of the Presidency, denied reports yesterday he was opposed to a commission of inquiry into state capture.

Zuma plans to challenge a state capture report by former public protector Thuli Madonsela‚ which last year called for a commission to be established.

Zuma‚ who is cited in the report‚ said he was not opposed to a judicial probe‚ but did not agree with the terms.

Zuma said in a statement he believed some of the remedial actions directed by the protector were “irregular‚ unlawful and unconstitutional”.

He said in terms of legal advice obtained, the remedial action on the appointment of the commission of inquiry undermined the separation of powers doctrine.

However, in the State of Capture report‚ the President was not only directed to appoint a Commission of Inquiry‚ but also directed as to what kind of a commission he should appoint and the process that must be followed in appointing it.

“This contravenes section 84(2) (f) of the Constitution which leaves it open for the president to choose what type of a commission of inquiry should be established‚ whether it should be a judicial commission of inquiry or any other commission.”

He said the protector also directed that the commission must be presided over by a judge selected by the Chief Justice.

“Nowhere does the constitution or the Public Protector Act give such a power to a public protector or a judge. The remedial action‚ in its content‚ therefore has no lawful basis.”

Zuma said he also believed that the decision underpinning the remedial action‚ which was to outsource it‚ was irrational since the “only conceivable deduction to be made, is that the former public protector’s term of office was coming to an end and she was unwilling for the Office of the Public Protector to continue with the investigation outside her control”. — TMG