Zuma fees on Cyril’s radar
The Presidency has hinted it may seek a legal fees refund from ex-president Jacob Zuma.
This depends on the outcome of a court challenge to the state funding his corruption trial defence. The Presidency also admitted that large amounts of documentation linked to the state’s multimillion-rand funding of Zuma’s legal fees are missing‚ or have been destroyed “due to their age”.
The Presidency says the state has paid R16.7m for Zuma’s legal fees‚ but it is likely this amount will be disputed.
President Cyril Ramaphosa is not opposing court bids by the DA and EFF to stop the funding of Zuma’s corruption trial defence‚ which Zuma insists he is constitutionally entitled to.
Zuma’s lawyer‚ Daniel Mantsha‚ says this is because he is accused of abusing his public office to commit corruption‚ and this means the charges are linked to his position.
Presidency DG Reginald Lubisi states in an affidavit filed on Tuesday that this funding was given to Zuma under the State Attorneys Act. “The rationale ... is to recognise that there are circumstances where an official is exposed to risk of litigation by virtue of his or her office no matter the rank. The official should not be liable for claims arising from acts committed in the course and scope of his or her official duties.”
He adds this funding would be forfeited if it could be shown that the accused official “did not act in the course and scope of his or her employment”.
Lubisi has sought to explain Ramaphosa’s stance on the case‚ and detailed why the Presidency failed to provide a full set of documents linked to the 2006 decision to fund Zuma’s fees.
Lubisi said the Presidency had done its best to locate documents that recorded the fees deal – and how it was applied. Zuma’s former lawyer‚ Michael Hulley‚ was asked to assist‚ but did not respond to two written requests.
According to Lubisi‚ payment of Zuma’s fees began in 2004‚ when the Presidency paid for a lawyer to monitor the trial of Zuma’s ex-financial advisor‚ Schabir Shaik‚ charged with corrupting Zuma.
When Zuma was charged with corruption in 2005‚ former justice minister Brigette Mabandla advised then president Thabo Mbeki that he qualified for state funding of his defence. The Presidency went on to fund multiple failed cases brought by Zuma – for instance a challenge to the search and seizure raids conducted by the Scorpions on his and his lawyers properties‚ and one to the Scorpions’ efforts to secure evidence against him in Mauritius. He also took the NPA to court for failing to seek representations from him on why the case against him should be dropped.
But‚ while Zuma has agreed to refund the state if he is convicted of corruption‚ it is unclear if this includes the multiple failed civil applications linked to the case.
“It is correct that the Presidency has not yet requested a refund of any of the funding provided to Mr Zuma‚” Lubisi said. “We await the outcome of this litigation before we do so.” – DDC
Large amounts of documentation are missing‚ or have been destroyed
I don’t regret taking this job – I feel like I walked away with my head held high