Zuma’s profound betrayal

[FORMER president Jacob] Zuma is right for a change – we should stop talking about him in our meetings. But that is because he is a detraction, a negative political force and we run the risk of making him a personality cult.

Zuma’s problems are legal and we should refrain from making his court appearances a political event.

But then he has complicated matters with comments that are baffling. According to some reports, he has threatened to reveal incriminating information on those who come forward with incriminating information on him.

This sounds like intimidation of witnesses. Then there is the question of how he came to know of incriminating evidence on others during his presidency. Was he a participant or a witness? Did he make use of state organs and information to spy on civil servants or even political opponents?

Are the corrupt officials he is alluding to still part of key state organs such as the NPA, the police and state enterprises meant to investigate illegal activities during his tenure as president?

How can we trust them to do their jobs investigating state capture if he has a gun at their heads?

The unmistakable implication of his statement is that as president, he had knowledge of illegal activities by some citizens but failed to prosecute them as required by his presidential duty to protect the Constitution. Even more damning is that he concealed that information to use as a bargaining chip on witnesses who come forward with incriminating information on him. The depth of betrayal of our trust as a society is profound.

This presents a challenge for the country. Legal minds can best tell us if he can be compelled to reveal the identities of these corrupt officials and their crimes. He was a civil servant and any information he gathered while in office should belong to the public.

The other option of course is to offer reduced sentences or immunity to those who come forward with credible evidence of any crimes involving them and the former president.

Somewhat more radical would be the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate and prosecute state capture cases because of the possible presence of corrupt officials in the NPA.

We have no reason not to believe him. — Wongaletu Vanda, via e-mail