ANC says Zuma defence 'methodology' not appropriate
In its attempt to save Jacob Zuma from his prosecutions woes, the ANC has told the Constitutional Court that part of its leader's interpretation of the Constitution was flawed, and that his 'methodology' in defending himself was 'not the appropriate one'.
According to a Cape Times report, this is contained in the ANC's application to join the Constitutional Court proceedings as 'a friend of the court'. The ANC also says the Supreme Court has erred in its interpretation of Section 179(5)d of the Constitution, which says the National Director of Public Prosecutions 'may review a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute, after consulting the relevant Director of Public Prosecutions and after taking representations within a period specified by the National Director of Public Prosecutions, from the following: the accused person, the complainant, any other person or party whom the National Director considers to be relevant'. The report notes that in its application, the ANC agrees with Zuma's argument that the Bill of Rights ought to influence the manner in which Section 179(5)d is interpreted, but the organisation 'arrives at this conclusion using a different and more convincing methodology to the argument advanced on behalf of Mr Zuma'. Full Cape Times report (subscription needed)