Court erred in its decision on Zuma charges – NPA

THE National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has argued the full bench of North Gauteng High Court went too far in ruling President Zuma should face corruption charges.

The court ruled in April former NPA head Mokotedi Mpshe’s decision to drop charges against Zuma was irrational and he should face the charges in his indictment.

Mpshe’s decision was based on so-called spy tapes obtained by Zuma’s lawyers which showed former Scorpions boss Leonard McCarthy had political motives in deciding the timing of serving Zuma with an indictment.

In its application for leave to appeal the court ruling, the NPA argued by saying Zuma should face the charges, the court was interfering with the head of the NPA’s protected discretion.

The NPA’s advocate, Hilton Epstein, said the court had erred in its conclusion and believed there were good prospects the Supreme Court of Appeal could find differently.

“With respect, the court went too far in saying that he should face charges in the indictment,” said Epstein.

These were among the grounds which the NPA believed its case had reasonable prospects of success.

He said once the corruption case against the president was struck off the roll, the head of the NPA had the discretion to decide whether or not to reinstate the charges.

According to Epstein, Mpshe would have acted in bad faith had he continued with the prosecution knowing there had been an abuse of process.

“It may happen that during the course of prosecution certain facts come to light and he ( the NDPP) is entitled to change his mind,” he said.

Epstein had to fend off questions from the full bench of justices on Mpshe’s decision, including why he had based his decision to discontinue the prosecution based on untested allegations.

They pointed out the spy tapes had not been authorised by a judge, allegations made in the tapes had not been tested and McCarthy had not been given an opportunity to respond to the allegations.

The DA, which is opposing the application for leave to appeal, said it was not convinced by the legal arguments put by the NPA and Zuma ’s lawyer, Kemp J Kemp.

DA leader Mmusi Maimane was in court, and said the arguments presented by Zuma and the NPA were “spurious at best”. “It is clear that this is just an exercise to buy time and to avoid the president’s day in court,” he said.

NPA spokesman Vuyo Mfako said they were confident their lawyers had presented persuasive arguments.

Although some of the issues were constitutional matters, the Supreme Court of Appeal was competent to deal with these. The justices had raised this question in arguments.

The spy tapes saga has dragged on for seven years and the NPA can take the matter to the Constitutional Court if it fails at the SCA.

The DA, on the other hand, has invested years and millions in legal fees in its bid to have Zuma face the charges.

‘With respect,

the court went too far in saying that President Zuma should face charges in the

indictment’