OUR SOCIETY HAS ALSO BEEN ON TRIAL

THROUGHOUT his presidency, Jacob Zuma was on trial.

As a curtain-raiser for an uneasy presidency, charges of fraud, corruption, racketeering and money-laundering were to swirl around him during his tenure, thanks to the decision by the then-acting national director of public prosecutions, advocate Mokotedi Mpshe, to drop the charges.

By that time the media had invested every resource baying for his blood. All that was required was for the wheels of justice to move faster to finalise a case long concluded in the court of public opinion.

It didn’t matter that three judges, Vuka Tshabalala, Herbert Msimang and Chris Nicholson, had raised questions about the conduct of the prosecution.

Effectively, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) failed to discharge its constitutional mandate to conduct its affairs without prejudice or favour. In other jurisdictions, this would have put paid to the case.

A chronology of the cases indicates that the NPA was compromised long before Zuma assumed the presidency.

A careful reading of the public persecution and prosecution of Zuma revealed the ugly side of South Africa’s democracy. Zuma may have been on trial, but the media, civil society and judiciary was also on trial.

Constitutional principles and checks and balances were dispensed with in the frenzy to get rid of Zuma.

The obsession with Zuma stands in glaring contrast with how some in the judiciary and the media have treated reported malfeasance of the banks, construction companies and rating agencies. The cost of these malfeasances runs into billions, but has not led to strident calls for prosecution.

But nothing exposed the hypocrisy of the so-called guardians of our democracy than the drama that accompanied the appointment of Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, presented as a skunk of the judiciary. An assortment of non-governmental organisations opposed his appointment.

Constitutional principles and checks and balances were dispensed with in the frenzy to get rid of Zuma

Justice Mogoeng had served as Judge President of the North West, a judge of the Labour Appeal Court and a judge of the Constitutional Court.

All these facts were inconvenient truths for Mogoeng’s detractors. He was guilty of the crime of association. He was guilty of being Zuma’s appointee.

The self-proclaimed guarantors of our democracy in the media and civil society had been silent while conflicts of interest were being routinely perpetrated. Of particular relevance was the fact that the Pretoria High Court had prevented President Zuma from appointing a judge to preside over a commission of inquiry citing conflict of interest.

Yet the very same judges have remained silent when their own colleagues can arguably be accused of the same. These judges are effectively saying that they are immune to biases that afflict the general public. But nothing could be further from the truth.

The renewal routinely bandied around must begin with societal self-introspection. This includes a razor-sharp critique of the media, the judiciary and so-called civil society.

Seepe is an academic and a political analyst