ConCourt reserves Zuma verdict
Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi and Advocate Dali Mpofu
Those opposing Jacob Zuma’s application to the Constitutional Court to rescind its order to have him jailed have argued that the former statesman was clutching at straws to be set free and that “he always held the key to his own prison door”.
While KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng were plunged into turmoil following violent unrest and looting since Zuma’s arrest, the Constitutional Court reserved its judgment on whether it would rescind its landmark ruling.
In a marathon hearing of more than 10 hours, the ConCourt yesterday heard an urgent application brought by the 79-year old seeking the rescission of its decision to sentence him to 15 months imprisonment for contempt of the apex court.
Zuma was jailed for his failure to obey a January court order to appear before the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into state capture.
His legal head, Advocate Dali Mpofu said a contempt order had “criminal consequences” and Zuma had not been granted the rights of other criminal accused.
He said Zuma was detained without trial and had a right to have his conviction and sentence reassessed on appeal, just like any other convict.
But, Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi - who represented the State Capture Commission - said Zuma had publicly announced he had no interest in appearing before the commission and has persisted with his contempt - so his case should be dismissed.
He said Zuma’s argument that his age and ill health would be detrimental for him to be imprisoned given the Covid pandemic, “were factors Mr Zuma always knew about”.
He said “all of this” could have been avoided if only Zuma accounted for his time in office.
“Today we have persistent contempt. You are told to revisit your order, no contrition, no apology, nothing, just consistent, brazen contempt,” he told the judges.
Zuma argued that his imprisonment would not serve constitutional value but may be a political statement.
He also denied that he refused to appear before the Zondo Commission but accused the inquiry of having ignored his legal papers to challenge the decision of Justice Zondo to recuse himself.
He said Justice Zondo should have lodged the contempt allegations in a criminal court instead of the Concourt.