Zuma employs delaying tactics

PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma’s warning to Shaun Abrahams and two other National Prosecuting Authority officials of their possible suspension pending an inquiry into their fitness for office is a “sham” that makes no sense unless it is a delaying tactic.

This is the argument by Francis Antonie for NGOs Freedom Under Law and the Helen Suzman Foundation in response to affidavits from Zuma, Abrahams and prosecutors who last month charged Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan and two former Sars officials with fraud.

Zuma had, in arguing that there was no case for the NPA officers to answer, “demonstrated that his call for representations is in fact a sham”, Antonie argued, since it was clear he had made up his mind.

The president also “crafted a timetable” giving the three officials until November 28 – four days after the date set down for the hearing of the matter – which “by design or otherwise” delayed the need for him to take a decision on whether or not to suspend them pending an inquiry.

Antonie’s affidavit suggested that, far from throwing Abrahams under the bus, Zuma issued the warning statement to the three so that he could argue in court that the application by the NGOs for a court order instituting an inquiry and placing them on suspension was premature.

“This is a regrettable line of reasoning designed to delay,” Antonie said, arguing that the president’s failure to take a decision within a reasonable period in a matter of such urgent national importance could be reviewed by the court.

Zuma claimed he was “only obliquely aware of media reports” about the decision to charge the finance minister and ex-Sars officials, asking for more time to make his decision, but Antonie said in his responding affidavit the president “could hardly have failed to be aware of the fact that the charges had been withdrawn” and the impact on the country.

He argued that while Zuma seemed to think he had to consider the merits of the allegations against Abrahams, North Gauteng director of public prosecutions Sibongile Mzinyathi and head of the priority crimes litigation unit Torie Pretorius before deciding to initiate an inquiry, the question was whether there were grounds for one.