State followed advice to pay fees

President Cyril Ramaphosa has provided more details of the legal provisions relied on by the state to cover his predecessor Jacob Zuma’s legal costs.

President Cyril Ramaphosa has provided more details of the legal provisions relied on by the state to cover his predecessor Jacob Zuma’s legal costs.

Last week during a question and answer session in the National Assembly, Ramaphosa promised to provide EFF leader Julius Malema with the details of the legal provision or policy the state relied on when using state resources to fund Zuma’s personal legal costs.

The legal costs in the fraud, corruption and racketeering charges amounted to R15.3m. But Zuma also faced other legal battles during his presidency.

Ramaphosa said in a written reply on Thursday that the state attorney at the time considered section 3(3) of the State Attorney Act, “to give her discretion where the state was not party to a matter but interested or concerned in it, or it was in the public interest to provide such representation to a government official. The acts on the basis of which it is alleged that the former president committed criminal offences took place during his tenure as a government official both at provincial and later at national level.

“In addition, the Department of Justice considered section 12.2.2 of the then applicable Treasury Regulations, issued in terms of the Public Finance Management Act, 1999, read with section 3(1) of the State Attorney Act, as providing for an obligation to refund the state if any loss was found to be incurred when an official was acting outside the course and scope of his employment,” said Ramaphosa. “For this reason, the state attorney decided that it was appropriate to grant the request of the former president, subject to the condition that he make an undertaking [which he did] to refund monies thus spent should it be found that he acted in his personal capacity and own interest in the commission of the alleged offences.”

However, the EFF has said according to its own calculations the state had actually spent about R64m on Zuma’s legal fees, including the Nkandla matter and the spy tapes case.

THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CONSIDERED SECTION 12.2.2 OF THE … TREASURY REGULATIONS

Ramaphosa said the decision to pay for Zuma’s legal fees was based on advice from the then chief state law adviser, the Department of Justice directorgeneral, the minister of justice and the state attorney, who all recommended the provision of legal representation at state expense under section 3 of the State Attorney Act.

“The Presidency wishes to reiterate the statement by President Cyril Ramaphosa in the National Assembly that this administration is guided by the fundamental principle that public money should not be used to cover the legal expenses of individuals on strictly personal matters or who are found to have committed criminal offences,” the Presidency said.