Zuma ruling victory for rule of law

Yesterday the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) confirmed what many in the legal fraternity have said and, frankly, what was most obvious to any reasonable observer: Arthur Fraser release of former president Jacob Zuma on medical parole was unlawful.

Fraser, the correctional services commissioner at the time, released Zuma, his political ally, on medical parole in September last year. His decision came just days after the parole board had recommended against the release as it sought more information relating to Zuma’s said medical condition.

Zuma had been sentenced to 15 months for contempt of court.

In making his decision Fraser considered, among other reasons, Zuma’s age, his status as a former head of state as well as the July riots, which some believe was sparked by his incarceration. The SCA rightfully dismissed these as irrelevant to a commissioner’s decision to grant medical parole.

Importantly, the ruling clearly sets out the commissioner’s powers in relation to a recommendation by the parole board. It affirms that the board’s recommendation must hold sway in the commissioner’s decision. It also affirms that “the commissioner’s discretion to release an inmate on parole is not triggered unless the board makes a positive recommendation on the appropriateness to grant medical parole”.

The court states that Fraser had no power to release Zuma on parole and that it was not within his remit to go beyond the board’s recommendation and analyse medical reports himself. He had no right to second-guess the board’s determination as doing so would effectively undermine the board’s power and responsibility to factually and objectively assess information before it and to make the appropriate determination.

It is unlikely that Zuma will go back to prison he’s a notoriously litigious character whose Stalingrad approach is well established.

Fraser’s successor, Makgothi Thobakgale, will decide how long Zuma is jailed, should he be.

His decision is much anticipated, in particular considering that the correctional services department announced last month that Zuma had completed his sentence.

Regardless, the ruling remains a significant one, not only for our legal jurisprudence but because it affirms the responsibility to adhere to the rule of law by those who are entrusted with power.