Is Zuma dragging his heels to save his own skin?

POWERFUL factions in the ruling ANC are often unhappy with what they see as the courts’ interference in the powers and duties of the executive. In recent months, some of them have even gone so far as to blame the constitution for giving too much authority to the judiciary — saying this often “undermined the will of the majority”.

But these fierce critics of our constitutional democracy are often silent when the executive is remiss in carrying out its duties. President Jacob Zuma’s failure to fulfil his constitutional obligation to appoint a national director of public prosecutions is a case in point.

A civil society organisation — the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution — has been forced to approach the Constitutional Court in a bid to compel Zuma to appoint a permanent head of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). The post has been vacant since October last year when the court ruled that Zuma’s appointment of Menzi Simelane as the national director was unlawful.

Since then, the president appears to have made little effort to find a suitable candidate. Yet, in his own words in 2009, during a court case against the then suspended head, Vusi Pikoli, Zuma said it was “undesirable” for the NPA not to have a permanent head because this undermined the institution’s independence. He further argued that it was in the “national interest” for a new permanent director to be appointed to replace Pikoli “without delay”.

Why, then, is the president not acting now with that explicitly expressed urgency?

Zuma’s delay and his refusal to explain to the public the steps he is taking to find a permanent head for the NPA have led to much speculation about his motives.

With corruption charges still hanging over his head — charges that were controversially withdrawn by the NPA just before he became president — there is suspicion that Zuma only wants to appoint a director whom he can control.

Such suspicions have been given further credence by revelations that a magistrate with a questionable past is one of the individuals Zuma’s associates recently approached for the job.

The NPA is a crucial institution in the administration of justice and its credibility and independence are of utmost importance. Its integrity should not be sacrificed just to prevent the president from being charged again.

If the corruption charges are not the real reason Zuma is delaying making the appointment, the president should explain why he is unable to do his job.