Duduzane Zuma’s lawyer could find himself in a bizarre legal situation

MORE than a decade ago, acting Judge Mike Hellens made a ruling that helped to define the law around legal causation. But now that he has returned to his position as a defence advocate and chosen to take on Duduzane Zuma as a client, Hellens may have to argue against his own ruling.

In 2006, Hellens was the presiding officer in S v Tembani, a case involving a Tembisa man who shot his girlfriend in a fit of rage. The young woman was taken to hospital, but received negligent medical treatment and later died from her injuries.

Tembani tried to argue that he should not be charged with murder rather attempted murder because of the hospital’s negligence, but Hellens ruled that a poor healthcare system did not absolve the attacker of responsibility for her death in any way.

It was this case law, later strengthened by the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that agreed with Hellens, that has enabled the State to charge Zuma with a second count of culpable homicide.

Appearing on Thursday at the Randburg Magistrate’s Court, Zuma stands accused of being responsible for the deaths of two people after his reckless driving led to a crash between his Porsche 911 and a minibus taxi in 2014.

While the first charge concerns how Zuma was responsible for the death of young mother Phumzile Dube, the second concerns another passenger in the taxi, Nanki Mashaba, who died five months after the incident.

The State charges that Mashaba’s death was caused by the trauma due to the accident and has even used S v Tembani to initiate the charge.

It’s a bizarre situation for Hel- lens, who if he decides to argue against the principals of S v Tembani, will essentially be disagreeing with himself.

“It’s entirely possible and legal. He has different functions in this matter. Defence advocate Mike Hellens could argue against acting Judge Mike Hellens,” said a legal expert directly involved in the precedent case who asked not to be named.

The expert said there was room to argue that the case had been wrongfully decided, but that it may not be required if Hellens chooses to argue the facts of the case, instead of the principals set by S v Tembani.

It’s understood that the defence will argue that Mashaba’s death was unrelated to the crash, challenging the State’s causal links.

The State would likely have to prove that injuries sustained during the incident led directly to her death. It will also have to explain why the National Prosecuting Authority failed to initiate prosecutions for four years, since an inquest in 2014 where Magistrate Lalita Chetty found Zuma had been driving recklessly and could be held accountable for the deaths.

During this week’s court proceedings, the case was postponed until August 8 to allow disclosure of the State’s evidence to the defence.

However, even though the proceedings were short, dramatic confrontations took place outside court. AfriForum CEO Kallie Kriel, who has been pushing for Zuma to be charged since the 2014 inquest, arrived at court only to become involved in a confrontation with members of Black First Land First. (BLF)

BLF members, who claimed they were supporting Zuma, blocked Kriel from entering the court building and accused him of being racist.

Meanwhile, Zuma’s father, former president Jacob Zuma, was spotted in the parking lot of the court in a VIP protection vehicle, having arrived too late and missing the court proceedings.

Duduzane Zuma also appeared this week at the Commercial Crimes Court in Johannesburg, where he was charged with corruption for his alleged role in a bribe offered to the former finance minister Mcebisi Jonas seemingly at the behest of the controversial Gupta family.

Duduzane Zuma