Constitutional Hill

In theory, more legal trouble for Zuma

Shortly after being appointed as Premier of Mpumalanga in 1999, Ndaweni Mahlangu caused a stir when he said that it was acceptable for politicians to lie to the public, especially when they are frustrated by the intricacies of power. He also said it was acceptable for such lying politicians to serve in the highest office in the country. Mahlangu was not speaking about President Jacob Zuma, but one would be forgiven for thinking that he knew something about our future that the rest of us did not.

Normally it is not a criminal offence for a politician to lie. As Mahlangu understood all too well, if every politician were thrown in jail for lying to the public we would hardly have any public representatives walking free. Mitt Romney, for one, would be in serous legal trouble, given his rather adventurous relationship with the truth. Many South Africans politicians of the major political parties would also be in serious legal trouble.

But in exceptional circumstances a politician can be found guilty of fraud for lying to Parliament. Fraud is committed when a person makes an intentional and unlawful misrepresentation to the actual or potential detriment of other individuals or institutions. When the misrepresentation is in the form of an omission, the law also requires additionally that the misrepresentation should have been made under circumstances where there was a duty on the fraudster to disclose the information.

City Press reported yesterday that they could find no proof that a bond had been registered over President Zuma’s Nkandla homestead, as the President claimed in Parliament last week. If there is indeed no bond registered over Nkandla and if President Zuma therefore lied to Parliament, the question is whether he is guilty of a criminal offence.

Zuma’s property, titled portion 27 of reserve 19 of farm number 15 839, Nkandla, is situated on land owned by the Ingonyama Trust, headed by King Goodwill Zwelithini. Previous building work at Nkandla was financed by “benefactors” as well as by a bribe solicited by Schabir Shaik from an arms deal company on Zuma’s behalf.

An emotional Zuma told Parliament on Thursday: “I took the decision to expand my home and I built my home with more rondavels, more than once. And I fenced my home. And I engaged the bank and I’m still paying a bond on my first phase of my home.” Neither Zuma nor his prolific spin doctor, Mac Maharaj has so far clarified the situation or provided any explanation for the alleged lie told to Parliament.

The home is alleged to have been declared a National Key Point, but the Police are refusing to provide evidence of this claim, raising doubts about whether Nkandla was indeed declared a National Key Point as alleged. As I pointed out last week, Zuma was not being truthful when he claimed that he and his family had paid for all the building at Nkandla. Several shady payments were made to builders to help pay for the original building work, while Schabir Shaik also solicited a bribe from an arms deal company to help pay for building work at Nkandla.

In 2005 Tony Yengeni was found guilty of defrauding Parliament after he lied about receiving a 47% discount on a Mercedes Benz 44 from individuals involved in the arms deal. (Why do so many of these stories start with the arms deal?) As Yengeni had a duty to disclose such benefits to Parliament, his failure to do so in a truthful and honest manner, constituted fraud. He was carried shoulder high into prison by fellow ANC leaders wishing to demonstrate their commitment to fraud and corruption.

But what about Zuma? If he lied to Parliament, could this expose him to criminal prosecution on grounds other than the fraud and corruption charges which were dropped for political reasons before the 2009 election? The answer to this question would hinge on two related issues.

First, one must ask if the law should view misrepresentations by the President to Parliament as unlawful. Our law considers some misrepresentations never to be unlawful. For example, if a married man tells his boyfriend that he plans to leave his wife while he has no such intentions, that misrepresentation is never going to be considered unlawful in our law. Neither would it be unlawful to tell a very ugly person that he is really beautiful or a really dimwitted person that he is clever. These misrepresentations are considered to be outside the scope of what the criminal law should busy itself with. But other misrepresentations are considered unlawful because in terms of the legal convictions of the community (a fiction used by judges to determine unlawfulness) it would be considered unacceptable.

I would think that a strong argument could be made that when a President lies to Parliament about his personal financial affairs, it will be considered unlawful. When misrepresentations are made in a formal institutional setting like Parliament by a public official in a situation where that is explicitly prohibited by the law, then the misrepresentation must surely be unlawful. To this end, one must note that section 2(3) of the Executive Members Ethics Code prohibit members of the Executive (which includes the President) from wilfully mislead the legislature to which they are accountable. The President is accountable to the National Assembly, so it is clear that where he wilfully misleads the Assembly, he would be acting unlawfully.

Second, one will have to demonstrate that the misrepresentation has a real or potential detrimental effect on Parliament or on individual members of Parliament. In the Yengeni case the court found that members of Parliament as well as officials had a direct interest in Mr. Yengeni’s improper concealment of his fraudulent behaviour to Parliament and that the concealment and misrepresentations by Yengeni to Parliament was therefore detrimental to Parliament.

If President Zuma had lied to Parliament about the fact that the Nkandla upgrade is partly being financed by a bond, it would have a similar detrimental effect on Parliament. This is because President Zuma has a legal duty in terms section 6.4 of the Executive Members Ethics Code to declare any sponsorships or gifts as we’ll as “[t]he nature and source of any other benefit of a material nature; and the value of that benefit” to Parliament.

Mr. Vivian Reddy told the newspapers this week that he had lent Mr. Zuma money to help built Nkandla. if this was done on preferential terms (or example, if no interest or low interest was charged on the loan) it would constitute a benefit of a material nature in terms of the Executive Ethics Code. Parliament has a direct interest in knowing whether President Zuma is paying for some of the Nkandla building works with the help of a bond or whether benefactors are assisting him to pay for the part of the cost not carried by the taxpayers. Misleading Parliament about it would have a serious detrimental effect on Parliament as an institution, not only because it would not be able to fulfil its oversight role properly but also because the status and credibility of Parliament would have been affected..

(As an aside, it must be noted that if Mr. Reddy or anyone else gave President Zuma a loan on preferential terms, or a donation of any kind to help pay for the Nkandla upgrades, that would have to be declared in terms of the Executive Members Ethics Code.)

In any event, if President Zuma intentionally misled Parliament by claiming that he had taken out a bond to pay for some of the building work at Nkandla, when no such bond was ever registered, I would guess that President Zuma could be found guilty of fraud — on much the same basis as Tony Yengeni was found guilty of defrauding Parliament.

Of course, we all know that both the Police and the National Prosecuting Authority will never investigate or prosecute President Zuma for allegedly defrauding Parliament. This is because President Zuma has thoroughly politicised these institutions and he is now protected from investigation and prosecution. The fact that I can be so certain about this fact, says much about the manner in which state institutions have been hollowed out to protect certain people in South Africa.

  • Maggs Naidu – ABZ! – Zuma must go (

    Hey PdV,

    “In any event, if President Zuma intentionally misled Parliament by claiming that he had taken out a bond to pay for some of the building work at Nkandla, when no such bond was ever registered, I would guess that President Zuma could be found guilty of fraud — on much the same basis as Tony Yengeni was found guilty of defrauding Parliament.”

    Surely that would depend on what the underlying reason is for having lied?

    If it was to cover up unlawful state expenditure or corruption then perhaps.

    If it was to avoid saying his youngest daughter paid for the building out of money she won in the Lotto (I mean really won in the Lotto) then the consequences will/ought not be that serious.

    Chances are it’s the former!

  • Blue Ozone

    LOL. Desperately clutching at straws again. You are truely pathetic onse liewe Pierretjie.

    So tell as Mr. socalled “constitutional expert” when are you going to say something about the DA calling for the SANDF to suppress protest in the Western Cape? doesn’t it remind you of Apartheid South Africa. You know, when you were studying at the Broederbond’s Stellenbosch?

    I’m still waiting.

  • Mpandlane

    I wonder, if other members of parliament colluded with the pres to commit what might be fraud, could they be guilty of an offense for conspiring to commit fraud?

  • tumi

    1. Zuma should be charged with money laundering re building works paid by Schabir Shaik

    2. During 1st year as Prez he failed to submit Members Exec saying he didn’t understand it. I am sure he now understands it better and should disclose if there are other (extended members of his family) who are paying for it. He has claimed that his “family” is paying for the dev.

  • Klaus Muller

    tumi, assuming Mr Zuma has 20 children, the amount in question is 245 million, each, in theory would chip in some 12,25 million, where in the last 10 years have they amassed, legally this kind of money, not forgetting this is after tax money?!

  • Dmwangi

    More importantly: JZ should announce a flat embargo on all Israeli goods until they stop murdering children in Gaza City and end the Palestinian apartheid.

  • Lisbeth


    Shouldn’t you rather worry about al-Shabab killing innocent kiddies in Kenya?

  • ozoneblue

    Dmwangi November 19, 2012 at

    Cannot agree more dmwangi. Have you also noted this one-sided obsession with our prez and his family while the Western Cape is burning. As I said sooner or later the cameleon will show his true color, and it is even whiter than the palace where Anti Zille is staying and the white mishief with decadent black boys in CTs night clubs.

    It is all about him and his good life, it has never been anything else and his job is manufacturing propoganda to entrench this rotting system.

  • Uhm

    Blue Ozone
    November 19, 2012 at 17:33 pm

    I agree, Pierre should write an article on the situation in the Western Cape, but you should also address the contents of this article, instead of just complaining about what Pierre is or isn’t writing about. His motives for writing an article, don’t make the article legally unsound or untruthful.

    Come on buddy, grow a Pierre (Snap, you see what I did there?)

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 19, 2012 at 19:49 pm

    Hey Dm,

    “More importantly: JZ should announce a flat embargo on all Israeli goods until they stop murdering children in Gaza City and end the Palestinian apartheid.”

    Hmm – and expose himself to the wrath of Mossad Guys?

    He can play duck and dive with our courts, the NPA, the PP, parly …, but nobody messes with the real money.

    Anyway – the Israelis will probably tell him to stop killing his own people and stealing from abjectly poor children first!

  • Dmwangi


    Shouldn’t you be worried about the fact that nowhere in this article did PdV address the root cause of the issue– patriarchy– which is the meta-narrative underlying all historical events? Certainly the fact that his gender bias goes unexpressed in this peice, and is so well hidden, is excellent evidence of, in fact, how deeply it is imbued in his subconscious. I suggest you and your fellow crit feminists stage your weekly protest outside his office and threaten to remove the “L” from the party acronym unless and until he agrees to refrain from using his blog to advance penile interests via socially constructed concepts like “law,” which was created by men to subordinate women.

  • ozoneblue

    Uhm November 19, 2012 at 20:44 pm

    What is there to ‘address’ in this article. Zuma said he made a loan/took out a bond to build a couple of rondavels in Inkandla. Big fucking deal. While the pm of the Western Cape living in her Apartheid inherited ‘estate’ while she calls for the SANDF to put down protests against this very same system of privelege brought through decades of worker exploitation?

  • Uhm

    Uhm November 19, 2012 at 20:44 pm

    He said that, but it appears not to be the truth. He omitted other information (the sources of other funds used to build the residence). Exceptional amounts of state funds are being used to upgrade the “security” at Inkandla. None of this a big deal? Or do you believe that this is somehow justifiable? And if so, what reasons do you feel would justify this in a country where poverty and inequality is rife?

    The reasons provided for asking for military assistance is that the police are stretched thin. A police officer is bound to feel more threatened and act with lethal force if the threat, relative to his ability to adequately deal with the threat, are disproportionate to each other. A stronger presence could in fact discourage violent protest. The workers can protest as long as they do so in a peaceful manner. Burning, breaking, assaulting, killing etc, aren’t friendly forms of protest.

    All white wealth isn’t derived from Apartheid. As all black poverty isn’t a result of Apartheid. Do you honestly believe that weren’t it for Apartheid, that everything would be honky dory in South Africa? Every farm worker would have his own self funded Inkandla and all black South Africans would be educated.

    Say for instance 1.5 million white people in South Africa have jobs and they provide for a further 2 million white people, in turn creating more or less the same opportunity for them, almost 2/3 of the white population have a future. For this to ring true for the black population, almost 15 million black people would have to be rather well employed. This would still mean that 10 or so million black people would be unemployed/uneducated and the ripple effect of their plight would still mean a hell of a lot of people would be in economic trouble. Don’t be pedantic about the ratios, just try and see what I am saying. The challenges of providing opportunity for masses is a lot more difficult than it is for minorities.

    Don’t get me wrong, a lot of white South Africans are still eating peaches because of Apartheid, but these kind of blanket statements, that were it not for Apartheid all white people would be down in the gutter and all black people would be wealthy is absolute bullshit, and is based on emotional reasoning, not on anything remotely resembling scientific rationale.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 19, 2012 at 22:13 pm


    “Don’t get me wrong, a lot of white South Africans are still eating peaches because of Apartheid,”

    Some are now benefiting from selling “I benefited from Apartheid” T-Shirts!

  • ozoneblue

    ‘Of course, we all know that both the Police and the National Prosecuting Authority will never investigate or prosecute President Zuma for allegedly defrauding Parliament. This is because President Zuma has thoroughly politicised these institutions and he is now protected from investigation and prosecution. ‘

    LOL. Says the hypocrite who was cheering on enthusiastically as the NPA/scorpions pursued a political vendetta stretching over a period of ten years against Zuma and his ‘left-leaning’ allies. In order to protect PdVs Apartheid inherited privilege.

  • Nathan

    What if we are missing a trick in this matter?He used the word “bank” & ” bond”, so who is to say this western institution is what he referred to? No bank was mentioned in all of this. It could refer to his many benefactors. He has taken swipe at solving issues not the traditional way, but we should use local methods. So, I think we are probably getting excited and ahead of ourselves in this matter. Just wanting to give a different angle.

  • Brett Nortje

    ozoneblue says:
    November 19, 2012 at 22:40 pm

    Isn’t this guy half a unique intellect? When he gets called on a particular line of bullshit he’ll lay off on that particular angle for a couple of days but eventually his obsession with De Vos requires him to use the same ammunition again to maintain the suppressive fire 24/7.

    Someone ask him if he thinks De Vos would have been materially worse off if he had been born in the UK or the US or Belgium and see what I mean.

  • John Roberts

    November 19, 2012 at 19:49 pm
    More importantly: JZ should announce a flat embargo on all Israeli goods until they stop murdering children in Gaza City and end the Palestinian apartheid.

    What a stupid doos you are. You purposely omit the fact that Hamas started this by fring over 800 rockets at innocent Israelis.

    The fact that the Israelis have better aim and more firepower doesn’t make it wrong to protect themselves.

    If Zimbabwe started firing missiles at us and we retaliated then your fucked-up logic would be saying poor Zimbo’s.

    Sorry but you really are a cunt.

  • ozoneblue

    John Roberts November 19, 2012 at 23:25 pm

    Isn’t it articularly fascinating how racists especially of the South African chicken running type always fend for the Apartheid state of Israel. As if they are blood brothers locked in a cosmic battle against the same evil forces of real social justice that threatens the unparalleled privilege of a PdV.

  • Dmwangi


    Wannabe wealthy HFT guy,

    By definition, when one resorts calling others ‘cunts’ as a rejoinder, he’s lost the argument. (I would conjecture your fondness for the term is a reflection of your frustration with your dearth of the aforementioned).

    I purposely omitted this fact because I do not find it relevant. Your argument is akin to blaming Umkhonto we Sizwe for the crimes against humanity committed by the apartheid regime. Had the Israelis not stolen the Arabs’ land and imposed apartheid on them, I would find your argument vis-a-vis proportional retaliation, more plausible. As it stands, it is so absurd only an intellect as fine as yours could find it tenable.

  • Dmwangi

    Perhaps with your degree of sophistication you could publish an article in “International Relations” regarding your innovative foreign policy approach: white guys=good; black/brown guys=bad. I’m sure offshore-balancer realists will be impressed.

  • Mpandlane

    I’d be interested to know how we decide who’s white/coloured/black nowadays in the new.improved.race-classification-act-free. South Africa. ‘Cos just looking at a mac and tuning him he’s like whitish/off-whitish is kinda like sticking a comb in his hair to see if it will stay stuck.

    What I wonder is what happens to the improvements at Nkandla tomorrow when the DA wins the no-confidence vote and old JZ is out on his ear. Does it remain the property of the state? If not, somebody is benefiting improperly. Easy.

    As for people getting killed in the promised land..? Nobody wins, except guys who sell guns, and rebuild buildings. Right or wrong is just not even close to important. Do you really think if reasonable people sat around a table they couldn’t come up with a plan? It’s not about peace, dudes, it’s about war.

    The lives of ordinary people are just not affected by whoever the heck is in government: I’m still privileged, and my friend Z still comes in once a week to clean up after me, even if the ANC is in power and I willingly relinquished my right to vote. Wakey! Wakey!

  • ozoneblue

    The colour is irrelevant. Apartheid in the end had very little to do with colour and everything to do with culture. Its the crt theory that denies that fact, crt being nothing less than racial essensialism of the most obnoxious type. If Europeans landed here and Africans were culurally similar to themselves there would be no ‘racism’. That is why I maintain that the likes of DA/PdV are the most devious type of racists you can find. They are staunchly anti-Africamn however they claim to adhere to nonracialism.

  • ozoneblue

    Correction – ‘anti-African’

  • John Roberts

    @Dmangi, Ozone and other cunts

    It’s a false argument to say Israel is an apartheid state. But i guess if u repeat that lie often enough ….

    Sorry but there is no other word for you. Cunts.

  • daffwill

    PdV thank you for explaining this so clearly.
    In my opinion he is guilty, and was always guilty of fraud and corruption in the arms deal.
    So much supports that. The pushing through of the Secrecy Bill, the changing of all the legal institutions to Zuma supporters. Him feeding his lies to the public and expecting us to tolerate it … the list goes on. He makes Mugabe look like a gentleman, and where he in power as long as Mugabe has been I am sure the atrocities would be even more heinous.
    I cant believe that even his own party dont recognize that – because not all of them are Zuma supporters. It is already starting with the ANC Branches being intimidated by Armed Zuma Thugs trying to force them to vote for Zuma.
    The reign of terror has not only begun – it is now in full swing.
    Indeed a very sad time for SA .

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    On #SAFM #LulaMoment – it seems like Fikeni suggested that we’re recycling the same people but expecting different results!

  • Zoo Keeper

    A number of issues are raised by JZ’s defense:

    He says he is paying off the bond on the first phase of the estate. First phase, not the current “upgrade”. Where is this bond and over which property is it registered? He may have registered it over another property after all.

    Also, if his family have paid for the estate, are these gifts not declarable in terms of the rules – should he not be in Yengeni trouble? Just because there is a blood relationship does not mean these “gifts” are not declarable.

    JZ dug himself a hole here. Besides, if everything was above-board, he would have simply disclosed the innocence of the matter and embarrassed his critics.

  • StevenI

    @ Zoo Keeper
    “JZ dug himself a hole here. Besides, if everything was above-board, he would have simply disclosed the innocence of the matter and embarrassed his critics.”

    He cannot do this as everyone would be able to reference his openness where he was innocent, therefore he is guilty on everything he keeps confidential.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    It’s being assumed that Zuma bonded the buildings with a bank. Maybe he didn’t.

    “And I engaged the bank and I’m still paying a bond on my first phase of my home.” ”

    “Engaged the ” could mean anything. He could have had tea with the security guard at the bank. Or maybe he dated a teller.

    The bond may well have been raised with the King who is demanding a shit-load more money than the shit-load he’s already getting.

    He surely has not said that he got a bond from a bank.

    The land is held in custody by the king for the government. Government is Zuma led. The king is indebted to Zuma. Zuma may be indebted to the king. Nice circle going on there!

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    President Zuma does have a Home Loan

    20 November 2012

    The Presidency has noted weekend newspaper reports implying that President Jacob Zuma may have misled the National Assembly when he said he had a mortgage bond on his residence in Nkandla.

    We reaffirm that President Zuma does indeed have a bond on the residence with one of the national banks and he is still paying it off monthly.

    We urge the media to respect the agencies that are investigating the various aspects of the security enhancements at the residence as speculations and rumour-mongering will not assist the process.

    Issued by: Mac Maharaj on 079 879 3203 or

    The Presidency


  • StevenI

    Any bets that Capitec Bank suddenly finds Zuma’s bond as they had misplaced it and subsequently forgotten to register the bond.

  • Chris (not the right wing guy!)

    Assuming Zuma lied to parliament about the bond etc. I seriously doubt if he could be convicted of fraud.
    The question should be asked if there was a legal obligation (as opposed to a moral obligation) to speak the truth. The test to differentiate between a legal obligation and a moral obligation would be the legal convictions of the community, as set out by prof De Vos. In Yengeni’s case there was however a statutory duty on Yengeni to disclose the information about the discount, whereas there is no statutory obligation on any parliamentarian to speak the when addressing Parliament. It is easy to see why the legal convictions of the community would be that a person is guilty of a crime of defrauding Parliament where there is a statutory duty to speak the truth. I doubt if the same can be said in the absence of such a statutory duty.

  • Brett Nortje

    I have a problem reconciling this whole line of reasoning with S58(1)(b)(i)&(ii)

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Brett Nortje
    November 20, 2012 at 13:39 pm

    Interesting, Brett!

    I have a problem reconciling this whole line of reasoning with S58(1)(b)(i)&(ii)

    58 Privilege
    (1) Cabinet members, Deputy Ministers and members of the National Assembly-
    (a) have freedom of speech in the Assembly and in its committees, subject to its rules and orders; and
    (b) are not liable to civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages for-
    (i) anything that they have said in, produced before or submitted to the Assembly or any of its committees; or
    (ii) anything revealed as a result of anything that they have said in, produced before or submitted to the Assembly or any of its committees.
    [Sub-s. (1) amended by s. 4 of

  • Thokozani
  • StevenI

    @ Thokozani

    Zuma does have a bond

    You didn’t quote the opening gambit:

    “Jacob Zuma did have a bond on his Nkandla home – and may still be paying it off – but the details of the loan raise more questions than answers.”

  • Dirk de Vos

    A quote from the article: “But other misrepresentations are considered unlawful because in terms of the legal convictions of the community (a fiction used by judges to determine unlawfulness) it would be considered unacceptable.” Huh?

  • StevenI

    @ Dirk de Vos

    “legal convictions of the community”


    “In any given situation the question is asked whether the defendant’s conduct was reasonable according to the legal convictions or feelings of the community

  • Gwebecimele
  • Gwebecimele

    QUOTE OF THE WEEK by Jabu Mabuza, new Telkom Chairman

    “The day shareholders give you a strategy, they may as well run the business.”

    May be someone should whisper in his ear that Telkom might become an SOE WITH ONE SHAREHOLD soon.

  • Oupoot

    Somewhat off the point: 2 particular articles in the ST the past few weeks have reported strong evidence exists that Mbeki interfered in the prosecutions of Zuma and Selebi. He may have done it with a different motive to Zuma (e.g. protecting the ANC vs protecting himself), but he still interfered and overstepped the boundaries between the NPA and the Executive. In hindsight I will say that the ANC was correct in recalling Mbeki by asking for his resignation. I dont see how Mbeki could have survived even an impeachment if he did not resign given the evidence that is slowly beginning to emerge.

    We should actually applaud the NEC for having enough backbone to belief in the constitution and parliament. Even if they postpone the parliament discussion of no confidence to next year, it does not mean the political value of the discussion will recede. In fact, those opposing Zuma in the ANC may first want to know how much anti-zuma support exist on the ground within the ANC so as to be confident they can pass this motion early next year, i.e. remove Zuma as SA president even if he remains president of the ANC.

    The rot that are now clearly evident under the Zuma administration has been set in motion under the Mbeki administration. (how can political commentators not blame Obama but Bush, and then blame Zuma and not Mbeki, for the policies and outcomes of their respective administrations? both have been in office about the same time). However, unlike more mature democracies, the new Zuma administration did not set about correcting the mistakes of the past, but trying to exploit these as best as they could.

  • Gwebecimele

    Give this Judge(slave driver) a “Tea”. Lots of tardiness in our courts.
    Widows and orphans lost money in this case.

  • Gwebecimele
  • Vuyo

    Clearly you are gullible and confused, probably cant tell the wood from the trees, etc.

  • ozoneblue

    So Zuma has a bond.

    What an embarassing croack of shit this blog entry is then. Much ado about nothing as I said while Rome is burning on the footsteps of privilege of UCT and Stellenbosch. But not much different than the last 5 entries that are obvious feverish desperate attempt to manufature propaganda before ANC shall select cde. Zuma again.

  • ozoneblue


    Precisely. The roots are the arms deal and the abuse of state institutions started under Mbeki. And the likes of PdV backed by the neoliberal media turned a blind eye to it, Zuma was the bad gay then as he is the bad guy now. This blog has focused almost excusively on attempting to destroy the political career of one single individual for more than six years now.

    You need to ask yourself why.

  • Brett Nortje

    Jy praat net soveel stront as gewoonlik. Jou ma en pa het jou nie groot gemaak om ‘n leuenaar te wees nie.

    Die hoogste boom trek die meeste wind. Die Staatspresident kry die meeste aandag en as dinge sleg lyk is dit negatiewe aandag. As dinge al hoe slegter lyk kry hy al hoe meer negatiewe aandag.

    Dit is seker nie bo jou vuurmaak plek nie of hoe?

  • ozoneblue

    Brett. You said I’m ‘obsessed’ with this stellenbosch bred tailgunner. But in 2006 Zuma was not governing SA but Mbeki was. We know now that he abused the NPA/scorpions for political control. PdV, together with the DA, the media and white South Africa was happily cheering along. I have fokkol time for your sickening hypocrisy and your double standards boet.

  • Brett Nortje

    Jy was seker die skool boelie, ne?

    Jy blaf vir effek soos ‘n banggat hond. Net so irrasioneel. Net ‘n konstante stroom sinnelose aggressie.

    Een PK en jy’s weg.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 20, 2012 at 17:03 pm


    “Zuma was the bad gay”


    You should go into the closet with him!

  • Chris (Not the right wing guy)

    Brett Nortje
    November 20, 2012 at 18:00 pm

    Volg die raad van die Prediker, en moet nie met ‘n dwaas probeer argumenteer nie. In hierdie geval is dit ‘n mors van data.
    (In English – don’t argue with a fool).

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Chris (Not the right wing guy)
    November 20, 2012 at 19:29 pm

    Hey R-W-G,

    (In English – don’t argue with a fool).

    OB is not a fool – people in Potch are impressed by him.

    Ok, I lie – he is a fool!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ OzoneBlue.

    ” While the pm of the Western Cape living in her Apartheid inherited ‘estate’ while she calls for the SANDF to put down protests”

    Thanks OB, this is exactly what I have been saying all along. The liberal media makes a big fuss about Marikana and Nkandla. But who notices that Zille has killed thousands, and wasted billions converting Robben Island into a penguin hotel and conference centre!

  • Chris (Not the right wing guy)

    Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!
    November 20, 2012 at 20:08 pm

    I know the people in Potch, and nobody is impressed with him.
    Bottom line: You are correct, you lie!

  • ozoneblue


    You may have a point Chris,. Those of us like that big fool FW who convinced our fellow Afrikaners to vote ‘yes’ in 1992 look and certainly feel like a bunch of fucking slobbering morons. We should not have been so ‘stupid’ as PdV calls us and have should rather have looked up to Israel on how to forge a harmonious multicultural dispensation even if it took a bit longer.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    Mr Zuma is not a bookkeeper. It is irresponsible to demand that he account for every penny used to erect his bungalows. Mr Mbeki once warned that the white liberal media were becoming “fishers of corrupt men.” Now we see the fruits of that tendency. At a time when Zille is preparing her own Marikana, the white liberal press is fixated on Mr Zuma’s privates and invading his privacy. As the Americans say, “go figure”!

  • StevenI

    @ Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    aka MDF (Medium Density Fibreboard)

    As thick as two short planks as usual……………………………..

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 21, 2012 at 9:14 am


    “As thick as two short planks as usual……………………………..”

    Well spotted StevenI.

    Dworky is really the most thick, unintelligent, uninspiring, un-everything around.

    Everyone thought quite the opposite until you wisely caught up to him!

  • Brett Nortje

    Maggs, you and I are headed for fisticuffs.

    Everyone knows OBS is more obtuse.

  • Anonymouse

    See this and revisit the Shaik case to see where Jacob’s money to build Nkandla initoially came from while it was still a covert operation –

    Intriguing. Come to think of it, I, as a Christian (and those in the Judean faith will also understand), know of another ‘Jacob’ in history who lied and even cheated his elder twin brother out of his ‘firstborn rights’ by misleading his blind old father to bless him instead of his brother and, in the end came of scott-free. That was foretold, because, when he was bporn as trhe second of twins, he came out of the womb grabbing his twin’s heel – which, in Jewish tradition means that he will be a ‘liar and a cheat’ and, which led to him being called ‘Jacob’ – a name associated with being a liar and a cheat. Now, our Jacob is not one of twins (as far as we know), but he surely is a liar and a cheat – and he lives up to the taint that his Western name saddled him up with. Isn’t his nose growing lately?

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Brett Nortje
    November 21, 2012 at 9:21 am


    “Everyone knows OBS is more obtuse.”

    But OB is really dof – and everyone knows we should not be making fun of those less fortunate than us.

    Dworky on the other hand …

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    So now – who’s lying???

    on Tuesday FNB said that could not be true.

    “FNB does not grant home loans to individual applicants for housing developments that are carried out on tribal land, as the properties are not held under separate title. FNB cannot register a bond over the individual homes,” said Jan Kleynhans, chief executive of FNB Home Loans, in a written response to questions. “Legally, people who currently live on land owned by a tribal authority have no claim to ownership of the land.”

    President Jacob Zuma first applied for a home loan on his Nkandla residence in 2001, when it was worth between R650 000 and R750 000 according to a bank valuation and insurance assessments.

    By December 2002 he had been granted that home loan by First National Bank (FNB), despite being in dire financial straits, not having a formal lease on the land, and a bank policy not to bond property owned by tribal trusts.

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Steveni, it does you no credit to label me “thick as two planks.” This is a forum for REASONED DEBATE. I suggest that you attack my arguments, not my intelligence.


  • StevenI

    @ MDF

    “It is irresponsible to demand that he account for every penny used to erect his bungalows”
    Yes it is irresponsible – it also shows he knows there’s more to be gotten

    “Mr Mbeki once warned that the white liberal media were becoming “fishers of corrupt men.”
    They do this to stave their collective conscience as they believed that what happened in the rest of Africa would never happen in RSA

    “At a time when Zille is preparing her own Marikana, ”
    Hogwash – suitably aided and abetted by the wonderful ANC/EFF

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder
    November 21, 2012 at 10:41 am

    Awww Dworky,

    Ag shame man, StevenI hurt your feelings. 😥

    That aside – do you think the thickness of planks are inversely proportional to their shortness?

    Are TWO planks thicker or shorter than one?

    Would you like to remove the planks from StevenI’s eye?

  • StevenI

    @ Maggs

    To add injury to insult Englishmen call Afrikaners planks

  • Maggs Naidu – ABZ! – Zuma must go (

    November 21, 2012 at 18:34 pm


    “To add injury to insult Englishmen call Afrikaners planks”

    Whew, we need to correct the race issue – damn you’re racist.

    But now that you mention it let’s clear up the race thingy.

    Dworky is Mossad or Duck, depending on his mood.

    OB is the Englishman as Englishman as a Potch oke can be.

    Brett is the Plank when he’s not Mshini Wami-ing that is.

    Dmwangi is a closet heterosexual.

    JR is a traitor – he left us to live with other racists in Manley.

    Khosi counts boys at school.

    Sne is a #ProfessionalBlack.

    Gwebs is a #CleverBlack.

    Zuma is a PROFESSOR.

    Pierre de Vos has asylum in the Republic of the Western Cape – he’s an educational refugee.

    Prof MO has absconded.

    Me – I’m in India with 1.3 billion other coolies eating bunny-chow.

    Finally, nobody supported apartheid.

    There’s more but you get the drift – this is a non-racial blog, we don’t insult people where they write, sometimes.

    Hope that clears things up for you.

  • StevenI


    No racial overtones intended. Apologies to all if offended.

    Tongue in cheek.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 21, 2012 at 20:09 pm

    Hey StevenI,

    “No racial overtones intended. Apologies to all if offended.”

    Not to worry.

    The Englishman (OB) and Afrikaner (Brett) are not capable of offended – they are “as thick as two short planks”.

    I’d worry about Dmwangi though – he loves Idi Amin!

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    @ Stevenl

    “Apologies to all concerned”

    I, for one, cannot accept your apology. I am but a humble journeyman. I do not meet the elevated intellectual standards of you or Dmwangi. But I am vested with inherent dignity and inviolable privacy. For that I deserve your respek.

  • ozoneblue




    You read too many ali g novels?

  • Mikhail Dworkin Fassbinder

    Yes, OB, I have read all of Ali G’s novels. Now I am looking forward to viewing his TV series and films.

  • ozoneblue

    Me too.

    He may well feature in a new reality show as gay republucan blackman with a constitutional blog and a big Mexican moustache.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!


    ANC chief whip Mathole Motshekga has proposed that the motion of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma be debated in the National Assembly in February next year.

  • Brett Nortje

    I hate to interrupt your giggling, Maggs, and have not and do not intend to read the article because anything to do with the ineptocrats is bound to be putrid k*k and sticky on top of it.

    But, c’mon! Outfoxed? Do you think as a terrierman I do not hold the wily Rufus in the highest esteem? I almost whisper his name with the same reverence as ‘brock’.

    The ANC ditherers do not deserve to be mentioned on the same page. They have surreptitiously repositioned themselves at least three times on the issue
    helped no doubt by the strling insights and wise Counsel of De Vos and the prodding of the Honourable Malale to approximate (at the third try) a position that is almost constitutionally defensible.

    Where they did have good luck was running into another ditherer like Davis.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Brett Nortje
    November 22, 2012 at 7:48 am

    Hey G,

    Come on – admit that it was a dramatically astute move by the ANC.

    It will force the DA to abandon it’s attempt to influence the outcome of Mangaung and the ANC’s internal political processes, through our courts.

    No judge will allow the courts to become an extension of the combative political terrain.

    Wanna bet that the DA will not have their vote of no confidence in Zuma before Manguang?

    Anyway as I see it, that will be in the DA’s favour – if Zuma is re-elected the ANC will be politically at its weakest ever.

    If on the other hand, Motlanthe is elected ANC President – then Jesus will not come anytime soon.

  • Anonymouse


    November 21, 2012 at 18:34 pm

    @ Maggs

    To add injury to insult Englishmen call Afrikaners planks

    Oh – I thought they called us ‘Rock-spiders’, but, be it as it may, we call them (at least those Limeys that reside in SA) ‘souties’ for ‘soutp…e’ – standing with one leg in the UK (to go back when the shit strikes the fan) and one leg in SA (to live happily off the fat of the land), with certain appendices hanging in the salty sea.

    Hey, Maggs – that is not racist as it is not a race / skin colour thing, but rather a language / cultural thing. But, ‘plank’ is not a bad thing to be called, since we can beat the hell out of those Limeys with our planks (like we did with our cricket bats recently). Not even ‘Rock-spider’ is bad – Arikaners were quick to utilize that name to come up with a extremely good rock music competition for young and upcoming school rock bands, called ‘Rockspaaider’, where bands are to each create three Afrikaans rock songs and perform them at various venues in a nationwide competition – and, even a few English schools have participated. So, we Afrikaners have another way to say ‘Touche!’ – we will always stand up, stand up, for our rights (and we will always be getting up, making things work, to live in prosperity after we have been trampled on – by whomever).

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 22, 2012 at 9:36 am

    Pah Dr Mouse,

    “that is not racist as it is not a race”

    You’re spoiling my racist party – go back to India to be with the other 1.3 billion other coolies!

    Anyway tell me how this works

    102 (2) If the National Assembly, by a vote supported by a majority of its members, passes a motion of no confidence in the President, the President and the other members of the Cabinet and any Deputy Ministers must resign

    Does that mean there’s a collective failure – so the entire Cabinet will be regarded as useless?

  • Anonymouse

    Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 22, 2012 at 9:45 am

    Yes Maggs – that is indeed what it means – remember, cabinet members are appointed by the President, who may hire and fire ministers and deputy ministers, and reshuffle cabinet as he wishes – so, if the President is caused to resign by Parliament – no, by the National Assembly (note that only an ordinary majority 50% plus 1 is required), then his whole cabinet is demolished. A new Pres will then have to be elected (much in the same way Mothlanthe was elected as Acting Pres after Mbeki was disciplined by the ANC to resign – or step down – whatever), who will appoint his (or her – but I don’t think the paternalistic ANC will ever allow that to happen) own cabinet.

    This is perhaps what will happen if Zuma is re-elected at the Place of the Cheetahs later this year with a small majority, and if there is a large contingent in the ANC that thinks he should not have been re-elected. In such a case, the dissident ANC cadres may well vote with the opposition parties when a motion of no confidence has been debated and voted on in the National Assembly (provided, of course, that a secret ballot is allowed), which might just write finis to Jacob’s career… But, by then, sadly, Nkandla would have been finished at our expense – and nobody can take it back from him, as it is tribal land belonging to the Zulu King – unless the new government seizes the land back… Hoo boy! … we live in interesting times indeed.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 22, 2012 at 10:33 am


    I’m trying to figure out the Constitution rather than the ANC.

    Did the drafters think that when a President fails it is the entire cabinet that contributed to the failure?

    Or is it that the incoming President must choose a cabinet?

    If it is the latter then that should also apply where a President resigns, dies, absconds …

    If it’s the former then perhaps no Minister of such a tarnished cabinet should ever be appointed again as Minister.

  • Chris (not the right wing guy!)

    Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go! says:
    November 22, 2012 at 11:46 am

    Maggs, Clever Trevor (and 10 other Ministers) had it right when Mbeki was kicked out. All the Ministers are there to serve “at the pleasure of the President”. Nothing prevents them from again accepting a post at the plesure of the new President.

  • Anonymouse


    I.t.o sect 91, the President is the head of the Cabinet (executive), and he appoints the Deputy Pres and the Ministers – who then form the Cabinet. (Come to think of it, the Deputy Ministers, also appointed by the Pres i.t.o sect 93 are for some or other sinister reason not called ‘Members of the Cabinet’ as are the Pres, the Deputy Pres and the Minsiters – but that is besides the point, really, because one can argue that, because they are deputies, they are also members of the Cabinet ipso facto.)

    When the Pres is removed from office i.t.o. sect 89, when he (she) dies or when he (she) resigns voluntarilly (in other words, when the Office of Pres becomes vacant in other circumtsnaces than sect 102(2), an Acting Pres takes over in terms of sect 90 and, presumably, the rest of the Cabinet will remain the same until a new Pres is elected – presumably, because, when the National Assembly is elected, the Deputy Pres (but NOT the Pres himself), the Ministers and Deputy Ministers remain competent i.t.o. sect 94 to function as the Cabinet until a President is elected at the next session of the National Assembly. After a new Pres has been elected by the National Assembly, the Cabinet (as it was) ceases to exist and the new Pres will ten appoint new Cabinet Members besides himself (herself) i.t.o. sect 91, 92.

    However, when a motion of no confidence in the Pres is passed i.t.o. sect 102(2), the National Assembly (impliedly, according to sect 102(2)) then signifies that it has lost faith, not only in the Pres, but also in every one of the Cabinet Members that he she appointed. This means that, if a new Pres cannot be immediately elected, an Acting Pres will have to assume office i.t.o. sect 90, with all the powers of Pres i.t.o. sect 90(2). Such an Acting Pres will then have the power to appoint Cabinet Members i.t.o. sect 91, 93 (here it becomes tricky – can the Acting Pres in such circumstances appoint aa Acting Deputy Pres? – your gues is as good as mine) until a new Pres is elected i.t.o. sect 86.

    In other words other Members of Cabinet must i.t.o. the Constitution follow suit if their leader (the Pres) is voted out in a motion of no confidence and resign. They are no longer regarded as competent to act as the Executive. That does not mean, however, that they (or some of them) may not be appointed again (in the same or other Portfolios) by the Acting Pres or the new Pres, but, until they are so appointed, they are not competent to remain in Office.

    Hope this helps you to understand.

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    Sorry Brett – you lost!!!!!

    Court rejects DA application to force Zuma no confidence debate

    The Western Cape High Court has dismissed an urgent application to force a parliamentary debate on a motion of no confidence in President Jacob Zuma.

    In his ruling on Thursday afternoon, Judge Dennis Davis said there were gaps in National Assembly rules, but found it was not for the court to dictate to Parliament.

    Democratic Alliance parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko brought the application on behalf of eight opposition parties on Tuesday.

  • StevenI


    But realise now they have an open ticket to go to the con court :-)

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 22, 2012 at 14:39 pm


    What will the DA say to the CC?

    That the vote is scheduled for February 2013?

    I think the CC will tell them to piss off!

  • StevenI


    If Zuma gets back in the ANC will let it fall through the gaps – then the CC can go to town

  • Maggs Naidu – ( – Zuma MUST go!

    November 22, 2012 at 14:53 pm


    It’s unlikely that the CC will allow itself to intervene in what is clearly political terrain.

    The DA, in my view, should be focusing on the N/A rules which Davis has hinted may need some reworking.

    But the DA is already on double-headed coin on this one – in court, outside court, in the court of public opinion and most likely, if Zuma retains the presidency of the ANC, at the ballot.

  • Zoo Keeper


    Have you had a look at Davis’ judgment? Does it square with the ConCourt’s recent views on Parliamentary rules etc?

  • tantric massage london

    En l nea, y todos son contra-circulatorios para mejorar la aсtividad cardiovаscular y
    haсer trabajar mеjoг al coraz?
    Ѕarvagya ԁеѵi 2 The 16 GB vегѕion,
    its lower-capacіtу sibling will come with a erotiс maѕsagе eхρerience when you want tο do to еach οther for the Alρhа Girl oг
    Queеn Bee’s attention. So better grin and prepare for your day erotic massage. There is also a two-night weekend package from 312 and day packages from 67 – 155.

    my web-site tantric massage london