NPA dismisses 'baseless' Zuma conspiracy complaint

With former President Jacob Zuma’s next court appearance set for tomorrow, the state has broken its silence on Zuma’s accusations that it secretly and improperly communicated with KZN Judge President Achmat Jappie – and dismissed this complaint as ‘baseless’, according to legal writer Karyn Maughan in a Business Day report. The National Prosecuting Authority's (NPA) assertions are contained in documents filed on Wednesday and come after a statement issued by the JG Zuma Foundation, in which it publicly called on Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng and the Judicial Services Commission to investigate whether Jappie had ‘improperly communicated’ with lead Zuma prosecutor Billy Downer. ‘The foundation reiterates that the injustice and prejudice that former President JG Zuma continues to suffer at the hands of the state is a violation of his right to be treated equally before the law and his right to a fair trial.’ Zuma insists that Jappie should play no part in the pretrial arrangements for the corruption case against him. The NPA, however, insists there is no reason Jappie should not continue to manage the case. But, notes Maughan, as Judge President, Jappie would normally decide which judge hears the case against Zuma and Thales. Zuma’s demand that the Judge President explain his ‘secret communications’ with the state may indicate his intention to fight Jappie’s role in choosing which judge will decide his fate.

Documents filed by the NPA this week confirm another dispute between the state and defence over when the Zuma trial will proceed. Zuma’s prosecutors, who said previously that they were ready to put the former President on trial in April, have made it clear that they do not believe the case will be certified as ‘trial ready’ this year. Lawyers for Zuma are adamant that he wants his trial to get under way in October, notes Business Day. And on the Jappie issue, Zuma’s attorney Eric Mabuza wrote (in a letter to the Judge President): ‘Unless a satisfactory explanation is given our client will be left with no choice but to suspect that there are attempts to manipulate the composition of the Bench which ought to hear this matter. We have indicated to our client that this must be some misunderstanding or genuine error. However, given the history of this matter and how he believes he is being persecuted by the system, he remains apprehensive and concerned by what appears to be secret and inappropriate discussions between the state and the honourable Judge President.’ In its application for directives, the NPA confirms that Jappie did request information from the state about the proposed Zuma trial date and the expected duration of his trial, but emphasises he did so in ‘accordance with his management functions’.