Quote of the week
Mr Zuma is no ordinary litigant. He is the former President of the Republic, who remains a public figure and continues to wield significant political influence, while acting as an example to his supporters… He has a great deal of power to incite others to similarly defy court orders because his actions and any consequences, or lack thereof, are being closely observed by the public. If his conduct is met with impunity, he will do significant damage to the rule of law. As this Court noted in Mamabolo, “[n]o one familiar with our history can be unaware of the very special need to preserve the integrity of the rule of law”. Mr Zuma is subject to the laws of the Republic. No person enjoys exclusion or exemption from the sovereignty of our laws… It would be antithetical to the value of accountability if those who once held high office are not bound by the law.
Secretary of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State v Zuma and Others (CCT 52/21) [2021] ZACC 18
Zuma’s rejects court of public opinion
Jacob Zuma said today that he will not withdraw his multi-million Rand defamation case against several media outlets. Addressing the Cape Town Press Club, he complained
“You cannot tell me that the media has the right to take the place of judges, and actually try people and say, ‘This one is guilty.'” Zuma said he had gone to court, a judge looked at the facts before him and found him not guilty, but “you guys continued to find me guilty”.
I am not aware of anyone in the media pronouncing Mr Zuma guilty of a crime. He might still be convicted of fraud and corruption like his former financial advisor Shabir Shaik, but for now he is not a convicted criminal.
This does not mean that in the court of public opinion he cannot be judged by his actions and associations. Mr Zuma does not seem to understand that in a constitutional democracy the media has a right – no a duty – to be critical of politicians who behave like fools and charlatans. This in no way infringes on that politician’s constitutional right to be presumed innocent by a court of law.
We do not need a court to tell us that Mr Zuma should not be President. We know a person who takes money from a convicted crook and then does favours for him is bad news. We know that a man who exploits his position of power and influence to have sex with a vulnerable women – a daughter of a comrade – who is a third his age, is not worthy of our respect.
It has nothing to do with criminal guilt and everything to do with basic common sense. Now, if only Swelenzima Vavi and Blade Nzimande could get a common sense transplant and realize that they are hurting the progressive cause by their support for Mr Zuma, we might actually get an ANC President in December that we deserve.
