Cape Times

State capture fight

- Zelda Venter

PRESIDENT Jacob Zuma and two of his cabinet ministers have suffered the first blow in their legal bid to stop the release of the so-called state capture report, whose contents they seem to dread.

The high court in Pretoria yesterday gave the possible publicatio­n of former public protector Thuli Madonsela’s report a boost when three judges ruled that four opposition parties as well as former ANC MP Vytjie Mentor could enter the fight for its release to the public.

Judge President Dunstan Mlambo, who is leading the threejudge bench, ordered that the DA, Cope, the United Democratic Front and Mentor could enter the fray against the bid to keep the report under wraps.

The report deals with complaints of improper and unethical conduct by the president and officials of state organs due to their alleged inappropri­ate relationsh­ip with members of the Gupta family.

The judge also dealt Co-operative Governance and Traditiona­l Affairs Minister Des van Rooyen a severe blow when he struck his new applicatio­n from the roll due to a lack of urgency.

Van Rooyen, Zuma and Mineral Resources Minister Mosebenzi Zwane had all made urgent applicatio­ns against the release of the report. This prompted the political parties, as well as Mentor, to file their applicatio­ns asking for the immediate release of the report.

The fact that all the intervenin­g parties are all calling for its immediate publishing could seriously affect Zuma’s case. It’s now him against five other parties who want the report to see the light of day.

Zuma, meanwhile, is no longer asking that the public protector be interdicte­d from releasing the report. In an amended notice of motion handed to court over the weekend, the president is going for the jugular – he is now asking that the report be declared unlawful and that it be set aside.

He wants the court to order that the public protector can only finalise the investigat­ions into the state capture report after he’s had time to pose questions to the witnesses Madonsela consulted before she brought out her final report.

Zuma also first wants to answer certain questions posed to him earlier by Madonsela regarding the report, to which he said he had not had time to respond.

Zuma, in his latest bid, said he wants the new public protector, Busisiwe Mkhwebane, to provide him with all the evidence which is adverse to him, so that he can effectivel­y exercise his rights in responding to it.

Van Rooyen, meanwhile, shot himself in the foot when he last week withdrew his applicatio­n to interdict the public protector to release the report.

Yesterday, he suffered a severe blow when the court struck his new applicatio­n from the roll due to a lack of urgency. Van Rooyen had on Monday yet again applied to enter the fight, and yesterday, he “on an extremely urgent basis” wanted the portions of the report that possibly implicate him removed.

He said he did not have a problem with the report being published, as long as it did not contain anything in relation to him.

However, Judge Mlambo and his two co-judges, Phineas Mojapelo and Dawie Fourie, ordered that his applicatio­n be struck from the roll due to a lack of urgency. This means that if the court ruled that the report be released, Van Rooyen would simply have to deal with the consequenc­es and the fact that any possible allegation­s against him would be out in the public domain.

Van Rooyen, as in Zuma’s case, said he did not have a fair chance to present his side of the story before Madonsela issued her final report.

But opposition parties argued that he knew full well since October 12 that Madonsela had questions regarding his frequent visits to the Gupta compound in Saxonwold, Joburg.

Etienne Labuschagn­e, appearing for the DA, after the court allowed the intervenin­g parties into the fray, asked that the court immediatel­y rule that the report be released.

“All that remains is for the report to be released… The president is no longer asking for an interdict (keeping it under wraps).”

Labuschagn­e said Zuma wanted a declarator­y order that the report be declared unlawful until he had provided his input. This, he argued, the president can do in his own time during a review applicatio­n and not on an urgent basis.

But counsel for the EFF said Zuma should be afforded the opportunit­y to argue his case today. Zuma’s counsel, meanwhile, withdrew an applicatio­n to have his applicatio­n postponed. The counsel said he would pay the legal costs in this regard of the other parties.

Dali Mpofu, for Cope and the UDM, said this point would be argued, as it was unfair that taxpayers had to foot the bill for Zuma’s applicatio­n.

PRETORIA: There was a heavy police presence outside the high court in Pretoria yesterday after political parties and civic organisati­ons gathered to protest President Jacob Zuma’s legal attempt to stop the state capture report being made public.

The report on whether the wealthy Gupta family had any undue influence on the appointmen­t of ministers and other top government officials was compiled by Thuli Madonsela before her tenure as public protector ended last month.

“Zuma knows that this is going to be bad news for him; he rushes at the last minute to do an interdict and if he’s given the opportunit­y he will drag us to the Supreme Court and Constituti­onal Court until next year,” said unionist Zwelinzima Vavi outside court.

“I hope that the full bench that will be hearing this matter will put its foot down and say no to further delaying tactics,” he added.

A crowd of several hundred people, including a large contingent of EFF members, had gathered outside the courthouse to protest.

Zuma, the Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditiona­l Affairs, Des van Rooyen, and Minister of Mineral Resources Mosebenzi Zwane have asked the court to stop the release of the report.

Reports at the weekend suggested Van Rooyen visited the Gupta family home in Saxonwold for seven consecutiv­e days before he was appointed as finance minister.

His tenure lasted just four days before he was moved to his present portfolio.

Political parties, including the DA, EFF, UDM and Cope are opposing the trio’s court action.

“If the court finds any adverse against him, he (Zuma) has an opportunit­y to go to any court and challenge the public projector’s report.

“But now he wants to delay it, shows in fact that the Guptas captured Jacob Zuma…

“Jacob Zuma captured the state and he must be held responsibl­e and accountabl­e,” said DA leader Mmusi Maimane.

“South Africans deserve to know the truth… it’s their money.

“I still maintain that the people who have been defrauded the most here are the people of this country,” he added.

Cope leader Mosiuoa Lekota said he had faith the court would handle this matter in a diligent manner.

“The judiciary of our country has proven itself to be outstandin­g in upholding the law and we are quite confident that it will not change from now.”

Lekota said Cope is opposing Zuma’s applicatio­n because they wanted to ensure that the country remained faithful to the constituti­on.

“As opposition parties who have consistent­ly insisted that the ruling party should be held to the rule of law, we cannot let the country suffer from the fatigue of struggle,” Lekota added.

 ?? Picture: MASI LOSI ?? OPPOSITION: EFF members picket outside the high court in Pretoria during President Jacob Zuma’s applicatio­n to interdict the public protector from releasing the state capture report.
Picture: MASI LOSI OPPOSITION: EFF members picket outside the high court in Pretoria during President Jacob Zuma’s applicatio­n to interdict the public protector from releasing the state capture report.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa