Former president Jacob Zuma has officially exhausted every option at his disposal to avoid a 15-month jail term after the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) dismissed his rescission application on Friday.
ConCourt dismisses Jacob Zuma rescission application
The highest court on the land sentenced Zuma for being in contempt of an order that forced him to reappear at the State Capture Inquiry.
The former president’s defence, led by Advocate Dali Mpofu, vehemently stressed to the full-benched ConCourt that not only was this arrest warrant unconstitutional, it was handed down in haste.
“Every person, even former president Jacob.Zuma, has a right to a higher court. Was former president Zuma afforded or denied this right by the conduct of the court? Yes or no?… No. The question is, was it justified if the answer is no. Unfortunately, the answer is also no,” Mpofu stated in his argument.
Zuma’s defence also questioned the provisions of the direct access afforded to Acting Chief Justice Raymond Zondo when he lodged a complaint against the former president after he blatantly noted that he would not appear before the commission.
Despite this, the ConCourt stuck to its guns and upheld the arrest order on the basis that no error was committed in convicting Zuma in his absence since it was voluntary. The majority also found that the former president failed to indicate the error in the ConCourt’s contempt judgment.
“The majority found that he has also failed to demonstrate why the order was erroneously granted. An applicant must show that the judgment against which the rescission is sought was erroneously granted because there existed a fact of which the court was unaware at the time, which would have precluded the granting of the judgment had the court been aware of it.
“It is not the case that the absence of submissions from Mr Zuma which may have been relevant if the court was seized with contempt of proceedings can render erroneous the order granted on the basis that it was granted in the absence of those submissions. Indeed, it is the trite principle of the law of rescission that the existence or non-existence of a defence on the merits is an irrelevant consideration, and if subsequently disclosed, cannot transform a validly obtained judgment into an erroneous one. Mr Zuma had multiple opportunities to bring these arguments to the attention of the court, that he opted not to, cannot mean that the court committed an error in granting an order,” Justice Khampepe revealed.
Zuma has run out of options. At this point, he will have no choice but to spend the remainder of his sentence under the confines of a suspicious medical parole he was afforded by his longtime supporter Correctional Services National Commissioner Arthur Fraser.
Social media reactions to ConCourt order
Whether this ruling will influence the second wave of riots that engulfed KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) and Gauteng in fiery riots remains to be seen.
Already, on social media, pro-Zuma supporters have cast aspersions at the integrity of the judiciary, perpetuating the narrative that ConCourt judges are part of a plot to assassinate the former president’s character.
Here are some of the reactions we picked up from social media:
Same split. Jafta and Theron in the minority.#ConCourt
— Khaya Sithole (@CoruscaKhaya) September 17, 2021
Listen to Justice Khampepe and thinking.
— Inspire them with your actions (@InspireLesele) September 17, 2021
"When it comes to law, it depends.." #ConCourt pic.twitter.com/2He10cuUCu
Ret forces should give up on Ben 10 @AdvDali_Mpofu or risk seeing Zuma getting jailed again. #ConCourt pic.twitter.com/Ay9FHpf4V2
— Lethabo (@Cheetahplains) September 17, 2021
Which White Man In South Africa Is Hated By Blacks As White People Have Done To My Father? Hunting Him Everyday For The Past 20 Years.The Worst Is That White People With Evil Hearts Use Black People To Hunt Another Black Man.They Have Used EVERYTHING & EVERYONE To Hunt My Father! pic.twitter.com/BR4JwnKFMb
— Dudu Zuma-Sambudla (@DZumaSambudla) September 17, 2021