Political war against me, says former president:

The end to government funding for his defence costs in his corruption trial – and court rulings that he pay back millions of rand in legal fees – is “a continuation of a political war against me”, former president Jacob Zuma says.

“I think it’s part of an onslaught on me politically, to disappear from the scene,” he said in an interview this week. “It’s not just people here. “I think there are also big people behind and outside of this country who are working in collaboration with people here.”

Zuma declined to comment on who he believed these unnamed “big people” were or what their motives might be.

“I will say one day, I can’t now because I’m in the middle of many cases,” he said.

Zuma will go to court in May to fight for a permanent stay of his corruption, racketeering, fraud and tax evasion prosecution, on the grounds that the case against him has been defined by undue delay, political interference and prosecutorial misconduct.

The National Prosecuting Authority insists that it is only partially responsible for delays in the case, which originated from charges laid against Zuma’s former financial adviser, Schabir Shaik, 17 years ago.

The former president is accused of receiving 783 corrupt payments from Shaik, as well as agreeing to a R500,000-ayear bribe from French arms company Thales.

Zuma is adamant that he is innocent. But, following a farreaching judgment by the Pretoria high court in 2018, he will fight his case with no legal funding from the state.

The court ruled that Zuma was not legally entitled to such funding because the corruption he is accused of had nothing to do with his official functions.

The court also ordered Zuma to repay the more than R15m already spent by the state on his defence.

Zuma is now trying to appeal against that ruling.

“Why am I singled out not to benefit from the state?

“If I’m right, it’s the law that if you are in government and are accused of things related to government, government pays for you, for your fees,” he said.

“If you lose the case, you then refund government. If you win the case, you don’t.

“It has been done to many, including former apartheid ministers, on serious matters. “Why not for me?

“I think it proves a point that there is a political motive against me, informed by things that many people may not know.”

Zuma claimed that no-one in democratic SA had ever been as unfairly treated by the NPA as he had, and says he should have been tried with Shaik.

“Why didn’t they charge me?

“By not charging me at that time, they gave me an impression they felt that if I was there they would not have won the case and they were gambling that if Schabir is alone, he could be convicted, and if he’s convicted, they will then use that.

“If they had a case then, as they say they did, they should have charged me.”

Zuma claimed further that the case against him, which was withdrawn by the NPA in 2009 and reinstated later after multiple courts found the decision to be unlawful and irrational, was part of a desperate attempt “to find me guilty of anything”.

“Now because they haven’t found anything up to now, they think they better put back this old case,” he said. “Maybe they could be lucky. “These days, judgments in this country can be very funny at times.”

Is there any fear on Zuma’s part that he may face trial, be convicted and sent to prison?

“I don’t have a fear, but looking at how our legal system has been working, anything is possible,” he said.

“But, under any normal circumstances, I don’t think there are any reasons why Zuma should go on trial. What for?”