Zuma fights back
Former president targets Abrahams to stave off charges Lawyers to claim that NDPP acted out of fear of losing his job
Former president Jacob Zuma’s fight back strategy against his prosecution on corruption charges will include accusing prosecutions boss Shaun Abrahams of not “properly applying his mind” when he made the decision.
Zuma’s legal team plans to attack the decision to reinstate corruption charges against him on the grounds that the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) dismissed the expresident’s argument that the charges be dropped without applying his mind.
Ironically, Abrahams – who has been repeatedly forced to defend himself against allegations that he is Zuma’s puppet and a “sheep” – will face accusations that he did not give proper consideration to Zuma’s concerns about the state’s conduct towards him.
“We are giving consideration to the one page and somewhat terse response received from the NDPP wherein he has advised that the representations made on behalf of ... Zuma are unsuccessful,” Zuma’s lawyer Michael Hulley said in a statement at the weekend.
“The rationale for this decision is not clearly apparent from the communication, nor is the basis for the refusal,” he added.
Zuma had filed multiple lever arch-files, containing numerous claims that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) had abused his fair trial rights, as part of his bid to persuade Abrahams that the case against him could not proceed.
His lawyers also denied that he had criminal intent when he received money from his former financial advisor Schabir Shaik, who has been convicted of corrupting him.
But Abrahams was not convinced. Zuma’s lawyers are now preparing to launch a review application within the next two weeks.
Crucial to any Zuma legal challenge to the Abrahams decision will be the Constitutional Court ruling on whether his appointment as NDPP is invalid. That ruling is expected any day now, and will decide whether Abrahams remains at the helm of NPA. If the highest court reinforces the North Gauteng High Court’s ruling that Abrahams’ appointment was invalid, Zuma’s lawyers will argue that this raises questions about his decision on Zuma. Zuma’s legal team is also expected to argue that Abrahams – under threat of losing his job because of court findings that he took Zuma’s side in the so-called Spy Tapes litigation – was not capable of making a neutral decision. Ironically, it was Zuma’s self-admitted unlawful decision to give Abrahams’ predecessor Mxolisi Nxasana a R17-million “golden handshake” that paved the way for the high court to rule that Abrahams’ appointment was invalid.
The court was, however, at pains to say that this ruling would not mean that any decisions made by Abrahams were now invalid.
Abrahams fought back against a Constitutional Court bid by Council for the Advancement of the SA Constitution (Casac) to block him from making the Zuma prosecution decision on the grounds that he was perceived to be biased.
Abrahams argued that such perceptions would always exist. “If, for example, President [Cyril] Ramaphosa appoints a new NDPP, who decides to proceed with the charges, a significant sector of the public will doubtless suspect that the new president has designated my successor with a view to settling political scores or to pander to the public perception to which Casac refers.”
What is now clear is that Abrahams is very likely to face such allegations of politically motivated bias from Zuma’s lawyers. There are also already hints they will argue he “outsourced” his decision on Zuma’s prosecution to a team that included Zuma lead prosecutor Billy Downer, and was “overly hasty” in making his decision. Hulley is understood to have been consulting with the former president about a potential legal challenge to Abrahams’ decision, a decision which will see Zuma summonsed to appear in the Durban Magistrate’s Court in the coming days.
If Zuma challenges Abrahams’ decision that he must go on trial, he will have to apply for his prosecution to be stayed until such time as his review application is finalised.
And that may take up to two years.