South Africa P.I.G.: NPA

Showing posts with label NPA. Show all posts

Getting to know the real Jacob Zuma

The latest controversy surrounding President Jacob Zuma illustrates a consistent thread running through his presidency: power abuse. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgG3HJrO_kjBJOnHNw1RrbD57iypM1sCZfvRMbP2_4T-1KhguMzJ72I5QSEwSKpvsMiaIxE4cJDzC7Kc8Q6H1cPICwCwgE3_kisOGm57rh9LYbVIqTzyAQEWHrW720grXqpX-aR7nR3x6_0/s1600-h/ancposter5475.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5439733198991668434" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgG3HJrO_kjBJOnHNw1RrbD57iypM1sCZfvRMbP2_4T-1KhguMzJ72I5QSEwSKpvsMiaIxE4cJDzC7Kc8Q6H1cPICwCwgE3_kisOGm57rh9LYbVIqTzyAQEWHrW720grXqpX-aR7nR3x6_0/s400/ancposter5475.jpg" style="MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 291px; FLOAT: left; HEIGHT: 400px; CURSOR: hand" /></a>Zuma believes he is above the law and social norms. He believes that - by virtue of his position - he can get away with anything. One of his close political associates summed it up the other day when he said, in conversation: Jacob Zuma has a mandate from 11 million people so he can do what he likes. This attitude applies to Zuma's financial dealings, his relationships with women, and to his relationship with his citizens. If any institution of state gets in his way, it is effectively neutered. If any government campaign requires him to change his behaviour, it is ignored. Behind his undoubted warmth and charm, this is the real Jacob Zuma. It is also the real ANC. This is how the ANC understands and uses power. We have, during the past year, witnessed the cynical manipulation that has turned the National Prosecuting Authority and the Judicial Service Commission into extensions of the ANC to protect President Zuma. The Zuma clique in the ruling party does not seem to grasp that, in a constitutional democracy, ruling parties and their leaders are not above the law or social norms. They may not ignore their own policies. They must be held to account. And they must lead by example. So what has this got to do with the birth of Jacob Zuma's 20th child? Everything. Firstly, Zuma does not consider himself bound by the norms of safe sex that he exhorts his fellow citizens to follow. It is worth repeating what he said in December last year on World Aids Day: "Prevention is our most powerful weapon against the epidemic… All South Africans should take steps to ensure that they do not become infected, that they do not infect others and that they know their status. Each individual must take responsibility for protection against HIV...It does not mean that we should be irresponsible in our sexual practices. It does not mean that people do not have to practice safer sex. It does not mean that people should not use condoms consistently and correctly during every sexual encounter. We can eliminate the scourge of HIV if all South Africans take responsibility for their actions." Quite clearly, there is one norm for Jacob Zuma and another for everybody else. This attitude is rooted in the same assumptions that justify his destruction of independent state institutions that seek to call him to account on legal matters against him. After all, he has a mandate from 11 million people. He can do what he likes. Secondly, the birth of his little girl in October last year neatly illustrates his abuse of power as a husband. This baby was conceived between two marriages. No culture, polygamous or otherwise, justifies cheating on your wife/wives. This is confirmed by cultural expert Ndela Nelson Ntshangase of the University of KwaZulu-Natal: "Polygamy allows all children to be born into a family, to have access to both parents, unlike an illegitimate child…If a child is born out of wedlock... the illegitimate child is in a vulnerable position, she is standing on a slippery slope because the child is born into a broken family." And yet, Zuma has tried to appeal to culture to defend himself. Like the race card, Zuma and the ANC play the culture card to try and silence legitimate criticism. This opportunistic strategy is actually an abuse of culture. Indeed, it is part of Zuma's pattern of power abuse. And it justifies further abuse of that culture by his supporters. As Julius Malema said: "We are Africans, we cannot discuss the private affairs of our elders and Zuma is a father to us all." The fact is, promiscuity and philandering are not part of Zulu culture, they are in conflict with it. As cultural analyst, Nomboniso Gasa points out: "According to the cultural milieu to which Malema refers, leadership is earned every day. Ukuzeyisa nobungcathu - self-control, discipline, modesty about one's desires are critical qualities of leadership." We cannot allow appeals to culture, especially when they are self-servingly distorted, to stop legitimate criticism of an elected leader who is accountable for his actions. Zuma can, and must, be called to account for private actions that have public consequences, particularly when those consequences are so profound. The truth is that Zuma has set us back at least a decade in the fight against HIV/Aids. His actions will have a far more negative impact than even the Aids denialism of Thabo Mbeki. Getting bogged down in esoteric theories and quack science would have had far less impact on people's behaviour, than a leader who by his own example, justifies unprotected sex. The inevitable response of millions of young men will be: "If the President can do it so can I." This attitude undermines the entire edifice of the government's HIV/Aids programme. It will destroy many lives. And it will cost the taxpayers millions in treating people who contract HIV/AIDS as a result. There is a clear parallel between Zuma's attitude to HIV/AIDS and his corruption trial. By manipulating the criminal justice system to ensure that he never had to answer the allegations against him in court, he sent out the message that it is okay to be corrupt. It is nobody's culture to justify corruption. In his admission yesterday, Zuma railed against "opportunistic" critics for encroaching on an "intensely private" matter that does not consider the rights of the child. Really? How touching. One has to ask: To what extent has his behavior considered the rights of this child, his other children, or every other South African child? One of the root causes of social disintegration in our country is the failure of so many fathers to take responsibility for their children. Absent fathers rob children of a present parent. Often, they deprive a family of a crucial income source to give children the opportunities they deserve in life. Zuma is sending out a message that it is okay to father as many children as you want, whatever the social consequences and burden on the state. The difference is that the average single-parent cannot afford to look after 20 children. Indeed, it is questionable whether even Jacob Zuma - on a President's salary - can do so either. Questions need to be asked about where he gets the money to support all his wives and children, but that is another issue for another day. It may have been feasible in a by-gone rural era, for 20 children of a single father to be properly cared for, nurtured and mentored in an extended family network. In a fragmented urban environment, it is not possible. The children inevitably suffer the consequences. It is nobody's culture to diminish their children's chances in life. Many of Zuma's actions demonstrate the ANC's belief that there is one law for themselves, and another for the rest of South Africa. Zuma can get way with things that ordinary people can't. Not only this, he is shielded from the consequences of his actions. This is power abuse, pure and simple. If there is anything positive about this episode, it is that South Africa is getting to know the real Jacob Zuma, beyond the charm. The honeymoon, (in the figurative sense at least), is over! Helen Zille

Getting to know the real Jacob Zuma

The latest controversy surrounding President Jacob Zuma illustrates a consistent thread running through his presidency: power abuse . Zuma b...

3:31 PM

R200m to fix vandalised NPA building

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjon3ozK7ClX8Km7MwkHfMlokbNARKDorL_Tx5PuhnT3-E8wRP6xUsSRwlVMeNex39yRURXCzjTOf_j8fdMcn115Erhigxlf1BuOxr6jm3Pi9W2YFK0og4sCXc4i1KaW9xCmUh8joIbBP4/s1600-h/InnesChambers-PritchardStr.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5345103361142455378" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjon3ozK7ClX8Km7MwkHfMlokbNARKDorL_Tx5PuhnT3-E8wRP6xUsSRwlVMeNex39yRURXCzjTOf_j8fdMcn115Erhigxlf1BuOxr6jm3Pi9W2YFK0og4sCXc4i1KaW9xCmUh8joIbBP4/s400/InnesChambers-PritchardStr.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 275px" /></a>R200-million. That's what it will cost taxpayers to fix up the R15-million offices bought by the government for the National Prosecuting Authority five years ago - and now, after alleged "technical problems", reduced to a vandalised wreck. Pritchard Str in the 1970's - The chambers were taken over from Innes Chambers, the subject of much controversy since it was bought by the public works department five years ago to house public prosecutors and allowed to fall into disrepair. Pieces of the handsome facade are now falling off, and if it were not for the pavement canopy, pedestrians could be killed. Poor security problems have also left the NPA contending with the alleged illegal occupation by Zimbabwean migrants of Innes Chambers - once considered the premium office space for some of Joburg's top advocates. The NPA this week confirmed that the uninhabitable condition of Innes Chambers in Pritchard Street, bought as its headquarters, had instead forced it to move its Gauteng prosecutors to the Inner Court building next to the Johannesburg High Court. NPA corporate communications official Bulelwa Makeke further confirmed that the alleged vandalism and illegal occupation of the building had been referred to the regional manager of the Department of Public Works for investigation. Last week, The Star was able to explore the 10-floor building without any resistance from the security officials deployed there. Vandals had ripped entire air-conditioning units out of the building's sides, leaving gaping holes in the walls. Walking through the building also showed how numerous door handles, doors, light fittings and electrical wires had either been stolen or damaged. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUVuLDQsoRnS4D3ciOxxSgbkYVwWfj5HA5KEUeDV6kea3bGOK_0x7O1lqiOxE6HLU86_F25eV2EvX6IKJUSvXrB8ogDbnWcE1_wXYuMHKuggwjlqePrAjBPgoX9oftS_VC3-xS5aKk7mA/s1600-h/pritchard_0.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5345103362577182722" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiUVuLDQsoRnS4D3ciOxxSgbkYVwWfj5HA5KEUeDV6kea3bGOK_0x7O1lqiOxE6HLU86_F25eV2EvX6IKJUSvXrB8ogDbnWcE1_wXYuMHKuggwjlqePrAjBPgoX9oftS_VC3-xS5aKk7mA/s400/pritchard_0.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 300px" /></a>Piles of rubbish bore witness to the building's nightly occupants and, on the first floor, broken pipes leaked continuously. Many ceilings in the building had collapsed. Pritchard Street (now in 2009), which runs up to the Supreme Court Building Responding to queries from The Star about why the NPA had not used the Innes Chambers building after buying it in 2004, Makeke admitted that it took the NPA two years to "activate" the Innes Chambers project. She blamed a series of "technical problems" for subsequent delays in the NPA's occupation of the building. "Professional consultants were appointed by the Department of Public Works to assist with the drafting of the tender for a construction company to undertake refurbishment. "However, there were complications after it was discovered that there were factual disputes over the lease agreements of some of the tenants. "This severely affected progress on the refurbishment project and during that period the term of the appointed consultants expired. "The reappointment of the consultants was approved at the end of 2007, but further technical problems were encountered with respect to the appointed quantity surveyors, which led to further delays in implementation. "The disputed lease with the tenants expired in 2008 and they are currently running on a month-on-month arrangement with the department. As soon as the construction work is ready to begin, they will vacate the building," Makeke said. The purchase of Innes Chambers has long been a bone of contention between the NPA and Justice Department, which raised the acquisition on the building as a complaint against axed prosecuting boss Vusi Pikoli during the Ginwala Inquiry into his fitness to hold office. In response, Pikoli said that the building had been bought before he took office. He was supported by Gauteng NPA deputy director Charin de Beer, who revealed that former prosecuting head Bulelani Ngcuka had been involved in the Innes Chambers purchase. She said under oath that the NPA had bought the building after the Chief Registrar of the Witwatersrand Local Division had indicated that its prosecutors may have to vacate their Joburg High Court offices to make space for "additional chambers for judges".

R200m to fix vandalised NPA building

R200-million. That's what it will cost taxpayers to fix up the R15-million offices bought by the government for the National Prosecuting...

2:37 PM

Zuma should have gone to trial, says Hong Kong judge

On the eve of Jacob Zuma’s inauguration as South African President, the judge whose decision was key to dropping corruption charges against the ANC president has said that the country’s chief prosecutor made a mistake in law. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeGHKtDlxeYzbfC0xirM4s8L3pN83x0n5FDBMBPkpaaFoBDeDBzu4f_C8FBliySTueUm5QfddeFrPq1kC24n10UvYPa2JxO_kkcu_hpX2zAdE60CLSS9cRoyoRx8yRA8IEFjkQteQUKc9_/s1600-h/mpshe7.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5333858764384157906" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgeGHKtDlxeYzbfC0xirM4s8L3pN83x0n5FDBMBPkpaaFoBDeDBzu4f_C8FBliySTueUm5QfddeFrPq1kC24n10UvYPa2JxO_kkcu_hpX2zAdE60CLSS9cRoyoRx8yRA8IEFjkQteQUKc9_/s400/mpshe7.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 298px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 231px" /></a>Acting head of the National Prosecuting Authority Mokotedi Mpshe (pic left) last month controversially dropped a corruption prosecution against Zuma, saying the investigation had been tainted by an apparent conspiracy by former Scorpions head Leonard McCarthy and ex-NPA head Bulelani Ngcuka. He used a case in Hong Kong as one of this key reasons for dropping the charges. But the former Hong Kong judge behind that important decision, Justice Conrad Seagroatt, <a href="http://grubstreet.co.za/2009/04/30/was-mpshes-zuma-decision-plagiarised-the-hong-kong-judge-thinks-so/" target="_blank">who earlier commented </a>to Grubstreet on Mpshe’s plagiarism of his judgment, has now told me that Mpshe was wrong to use his judgment to justify dropping the charges against Zuma, due to be inaugurated as president of South Africa at the Union Buildings in Pretoria tomorrow. He said, echoing the sentiments of other top SA prosecutors and widely reported in the local press, that he should have allowed the case to go to trial. <blockquote>"It is very strongly arguable that he should have let the trial process begin before a judge, leaving the aspect which seems to have dominated his proper role as the prosecutor (the old adage being a ‘prosecutors’ job is to prosecute) to be determined by the judge with [Mpshe] being entirely candid (as he should be) as to the conduct of the investigative and prosecuting agencies. It is easy from my position in the U.K. (or Hong Kong) to be critical of Mpshe’s statement but being as objective as I can, he really did not get to grips with the situation and seems to have made selective use of my judgement to try and put some beef into a statement which is rather short on substance." </blockquote> Jacob Zuma <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjftH2wSDraKLyELsRhK5CTSxaJHFFUwsH8ZnKd8EoOED5CzIDL14EIdIsCYymweIGS20oM_FXg0DEBZYpFnQGbcg5vSjCA_7AfwooOdvI_HtaHMpNwX8zwgGuL71oRSM3Mx69G2-t4cU28/s1600-h/zuma-argus.bmp"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5333858771236596754" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjftH2wSDraKLyELsRhK5CTSxaJHFFUwsH8ZnKd8EoOED5CzIDL14EIdIsCYymweIGS20oM_FXg0DEBZYpFnQGbcg5vSjCA_7AfwooOdvI_HtaHMpNwX8zwgGuL71oRSM3Mx69G2-t4cU28/s400/zuma-argus.bmp" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 237px" /></a> Shortly before South Africa’s general election last month, Mpshe sensationally revealed secretly recorded intelligence telephone intercepts which suggested that Ngcuka and McCarthy and other prominent political figures had been part of conspiracy to derail Zuma’s political ambitions by carefully timing key events in the process of the prosecution. But at the heart of Mpshe’s decision, in a lengthy statement read to South Africa on live television, was a 2002 judgment by Seagroatt in 2002 that he said justified his decision to drop charges. Seagroatt’s decision was not acknowledged by the Mpshe – the apparent plagiarism was revealed by <a href="http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=125134&sn=Marketingweb+detail" jquery1241883187869="3">James Myburgh of Politicsweb </a>– and he faced accusations of plagiarism, which were brushed aside by his spokesman. Further, Seagroatt told Grubstreet, his decision was later over-ruled by the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal and that Mpshe should have explained why he had relied on Seagroatt’s original decision rather than the comments by the Appeal Court. But the now-retired judge after reading Mpshe’s statement and after earlier criticising Mpshe for his lack of professionalism in his lack of citation has now gone further, telling Grubstreet exclusively that Mpshe’s was wrong to rely on his original decision at all.“There was certainly room for him to do so”. <blockquote>"What Mpshe seems to have taken as the justification for his decision was not a material aspect of the trial procedure but a decision made by some branch of the investigative process as to when and where Jacob Zuma should be charged on the basis of political considerations. That is an entirely different scenario. Many might argue that motivation in relation to timing of a charge is very different from manipulation of the evidence available. His own statement is so limited and sketchy that I find it impossible to identify why he was relying on my judgement. In the Hong Kong case the behaviour of the prosecution which I criticised was its failure to disclose material evidence in relation to an expert witness upon whom it relied as pivotal to its case. The first “whiff” of such evidence did not emerge until the jury were considering their verdicts and I had to stop the trial at that stage - a very rare event."</blockquote>NPA spokesman Tlali Tlali said the NPA did not wish to comment on the matter as it is going to the high court. The Democratic Alliance filed papers last month with the North Gauteng High Court for a judicial review of the decision by the NPA to withdraw all charges against Jacob Zuma. <a href="http://www.da.org.za/docs/7333/DA%20NPA%20NOTICE%20OF%20MOTION.pdf" jquery1241883187869="4" target="_blank">Read the court papers here.</a> The Story So Far <a href="http://grubstreet.co.za/2009/04/30/was-mpshes-zuma-decision-plagiarised-the-hong-kong-judge-thinks-so/" target="_blank">“Was Mpshe’s Zuma decision plagiarised? The Hong Kong judge thinks so!” (Grubstreet)</a> <a href="http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=125134&sn=Marketingweb+detail" jquery1241883247324="3" target="_blank">The James Myburgh piece that started all the trouble (Politicsweb)</a> <a href="http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/?p=974" jquery1241883247324="4" target="_blank">“Double Standard or respect for the rule of law?” (ConstitutionallySpeaking blog)</a> <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=nw20090416154009425C713094" jquery1241883247324="5" target="_blank">“NPA defends Mpshe” (IOL)</a> <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=nw20090416154009425C713094" jquery1241883247324="6" target="_blank">“NPA boss plagiarised judge in Zuma ruling”</a> <a href="http://www.da.org.za/docs/7333/DA%20NPA%20NOTICE%20OF%20MOTION.pdf" jquery1241883247324="7" target="_blank">The Democratic Alliance’s papers filed with the North Gauteng HighCourt for a judicial review of the decision by the NPA to withdraw allcharges against Jacob Zuma</a> <a href="http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-04-06-mpshe-zuma-decision-not-an-acquittal" jquery1241883247324="8" target="_blank">“Mpshe: Zuma decision not an acquittal”</a><a href="http:///" jquery1241883247324="9" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.mg.co.za/article/2009-04-06-mpshe-zuma-decision-not-an-acquittal" jquery1241883247324="10" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.friendsofjz.co.za/documents/NPA_Zumadecision.pdf" jquery1241883247324="11" target="_blank">The full statement by Mokotedi Mpshe</a><a href="http://www.friendsofjz.co.za/documents/NPA_Zumadecision.pdf" jquery1241883247324="12" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.saelections.co.za/articles/1757/shaik-thint-and-the-16-charges" jquery1241883247324="13" target="_blank">“Shaik, Thint and the 16 charges” (The Times)</a><a href="http://www.saelections.co.za/articles/1757/shaik-thint-and-the-16-charges" jquery1241883247324="14" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=&fArticleId=vn20090403071119492C241263" jquery1241883247324="15" target="_blank">“Zuma charges: Mpshe to meet Surty” (IOL)</a><a href="http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=&fArticleId=vn20090403071119492C241263" jquery1241883247324="16" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/?p=871" jquery1241883247324="17" target="_blank">“Fact: Zuma has a case to answer” (Constitutionally Speaking)</a><a href="http://constitutionallyspeaking.co.za/?p=871" jquery1241883247324="18" target="_blank"></a> <a href="http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/traps/2009/03/30/why-would-the-tapes-save-zuma/" jquery1241883247324="19" target="_blank">“Why would the tapes save Zuma?” (Michael Trapido on Thought Leader)</a> See also:- <a href="http://southafrica-pig.blogspot.com/2009/04/jacob-zuma-and-french-connection.html">Zuma and the French connection</a>

Zuma should have gone to trial, says Hong Kong judge

On the eve of Jacob Zuma’s inauguration as South African President, the judge whose decision was key to dropping corruption charges against ...

8:42 AM

Calling all South Africans to consider the importance of preserving our Constitution when casting your votes

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj44VCflYhco0YM3lf2KSATj_06PVODGy5vrXs62vri00EjSYdnEejXwNI6D1z5PIjwRA5Ym3FPTRN-LTouJFI5KXDNsGow9bXCWuxbPBMoKnvNa9tVhVRWM1c4VtMXCP4DDTYEiCnwnzVm/s1600-h/constitution.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5326400776805712322" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj44VCflYhco0YM3lf2KSATj_06PVODGy5vrXs62vri00EjSYdnEejXwNI6D1z5PIjwRA5Ym3FPTRN-LTouJFI5KXDNsGow9bXCWuxbPBMoKnvNa9tVhVRWM1c4VtMXCP4DDTYEiCnwnzVm/s400/constitution.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 260px" /></a>A deep sense of unease is brewing in the legal fraternity and beyond after ANC president Jacob Zuma's comment last week that the Constitutional Court's authority needs to be "looked at" and that its judges "are almost like God". The Mail & Guardian understands that a letter was circulated among judges in the Constitutional Court -- the highest in the land -- urging them not to respond to Zuma's utterances, and that they unanimously agreed to this. Zuma had been quoted saying: "If I sit here and I look at the chief justice of the Constitutional Court, that is the ultimate authority. I think we need to look at it, because I don't think we should have people who are almost like God in a democracy. Why? Are they not human beings?" Also this week legal heavyweight Wim Trengove called on the legal fraternity to "be brave" and to speak out against the National Prosecuting Authority's (NPA) dropping of charges against Zuma, calling it "incomprehensible and indefensible". And former president FW de Klerk called on Zuma to "do nothing that will prejudice the independence and dignity of the judiciary". The M&G has learned that the Constitutional Court's judges were "deeply concerned and perturbed" about Zuma's remarks and agreed among themselves that they should make no public response, given what they see as the gravity of his attack on the court. Those familiar with discussions on Constitutional Hill say the judges are anxious not to get drawn into a potentially damaging public spat on such a crucial issue. "The judges felt that they are mature enough not to respond," said one insider. "The Constitutional Court ruled against [Schabir] Shaik when they refused him leave to appeal his conviction and sentence. Also remember that the court last year ruled against Zuma's objections that the search and seizure warrants were illegal and that client privilege was infringed when the Scorpions seized documents from [Zuma lawyer] Michael Hulley's office. "The judges are judges - not gods. Zuma is implying that the judges think they are gods. It's not worth replying to this idiotic lashing out against the Constitutional Court. The judges have to stand above this and not respond," the M&G was told. "Who does Zuma suggest should be the highest judicial authority in the land? Two judges have ruled in his favour; some 20-odd judges have ruled against him. He can't attack the entire system because he is angry. It's very dangerous," the sources said. A senior Cape Town advocate, asking to remain anonymous, said Zuma's utterances are "unforgivable". "He is clearly, constitutionally speaking, illiterate and it's dangerous because it's subversive. This is our future leader, who will have to appoint the judges of the Constitutional Court. Will he take us to the American model where judges are overt political appointments?" the advocate asked. Speaking at the University of Cape Town, Trengove -- who acted for the NPA against Zuma -- said the decision to drop charges was flawed and "indeed ominous" and "had undermined the entire judicial process". "I do believe that it is time for all of us -- and particularly for lawyers -- to stand up and speak out about abuses of this kind. Lawyers have a particular duty to do so and, if we don't, we might one day look back at this decision and realise that it was a tipping point leading to the slippery slope of erosion and ultimate destruction of the rule of law," Trengove told an audience of students and advocates. De Klerk has called on Zuma to "observe the spirit and letter of the Constitution. The NPA's decision last week not to proceed with the prosecution of Zuma may be identified by future historians as the point at which South Africa began to stray from the rule of law. "Recent developments affecting the NPA and his remarkable comments on the Constitutional Court raise serious questions ... An enormous amount is at stake: the Constitution is the foundation for our national unity. Without it we will disintegrate. It is the assurance of our rights and freedoms. Without it we will descend into the mire of 'Big Man' politics that has blighted so many other countries in Africa," De Klerk said. De Klerk urged Zuma to "do nothing that will prejudice the independence and dignity of the judiciary". He said: "I call on all South Africans to consider the critical importance of preserving our Constitution when they cast their votes next Wednesday. The Constitution provides the best assurance for the protection of our rights and freedoms and for the preservation of our national unity."

Calling all South Africans to consider the importance of preserving our Constitution when casting your votes

A deep sense of unease is brewing in the legal fraternity and beyond after ANC president Jacob Zuma's comment last week that the Constit...

6:47 AM

What is or isn’t a Crime in South Africa

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuVKAHABfNcyL5sScNUdI_mIBdms0o_9TcwT7GJybl7GVRg4Hc3HVg5IIMWX8HqNE8HGSeEQViIBdvaahA0tXjT-Yu0s8WUTOglo8EfIacuVtKx6VVzcEmZrJmn6qp8-VqCfsuzkR6V5PX/s1600-h/South%2520African%2520Politics.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5322267814598418850" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuVKAHABfNcyL5sScNUdI_mIBdms0o_9TcwT7GJybl7GVRg4Hc3HVg5IIMWX8HqNE8HGSeEQViIBdvaahA0tXjT-Yu0s8WUTOglo8EfIacuVtKx6VVzcEmZrJmn6qp8-VqCfsuzkR6V5PX/s400/South%2520African%2520Politics.jpg" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 311px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" /></a> With all the pro-and-anti NPA articles doing the rounds I thought it best to give you some understanding of how the law works in South Africa and what is considered so trivial that we need hardly bother following up on it. So gather round the heath (hearth? — that thing that blows smoke as long as you keep fuelling it) light up your favourite Colombian poison (if you can’t get any, try the NPA or SAA, they know the top guys and always have tons lying around — the mules are the ones they arrest to bolster the stats so they can pretend to be doing something —) and let’s try figure out what is or isn’t a crime.Murder? — Well if you blow away say Kebble or anyone else that those in charge of “National Insecurity” don’t particularly fancy you’ll be given a Section 204 indemnity from prosecution. NB if you are some poor moron from a township or backstreets of a city then it’s a crime. So it’s a crime if you’re poor. Therefore before killing anyone check your bank balance. Theft? — If a judge from the Eastern Cape says that members of local government and their family stole billions and nobody gives a flying toss what does that suggest to you? If billions disappear on arms deals, Oilgate, Travelgate, Zimbabwe and everything else and nobody even blinks what does that say to you? It says that if you are Dave working at Checkers and you steal a tin of pilchards to feed your family then YOU are a threat to National Security but if you steal this country blind then you are worth being carried aloft to prison, medical parole and anything you get charged with will be dropped. Like murder therefore theft is not a problem being poor is the real crime so don’t let our courageous NPA catch you without means. Do you think Hofmeyr’s got all day to waste on poor scum like you? Corruption? — Ha ha ha ha ha … no but seriously folks. Rape? — Yes, but only if you can get the only people who actually deal with rapists effectively in South Africa. I know the taxi drivers hands are full right now but as soon as they are freed up feel free to approach them. The police? — Ha ha ha ha … no but seriously folks. Contempt of court? — Hlophe, Heath, Motata … let’s put it this way if you actually believe that South Africa has courts of law or equity then you have a complete defence. Just make sure that you are examined by 3 psychiatrists. Phone Schabir I’m sure those guys will say anything and become psychiatrists if you want them to but remember — poverty is a crime! Don’t come crying to me if you can’t pay for “top” advice. Prostitution? — Well let’s see you screw an entire country and give the money to the pimps while the rest starve all the while being told how much these elitist fat slobs care about you then, nope, unless they change the law prostitution is not a crime. Armed Robbery? — Impossible there isn’t anything left to steal. Do you have any money? No? Well there you go then you will do 15 years for Armed Poverty. **If any of the NPA, judges or other pillars of our society want to write in and tell me I’m making light of crime then may I just point out that the joke that used to be our criminal justice system and judiciary can’t be trivialised. It’s just too pathetic to be considered of sufficient substance to be trivialised. Maybe if you use some of the wealth we used to have you can visit Somalia and Zimbabwe and learn how to upgrade our pathetic system. Right now the Taliban and their zero tolerance on crime is highly appealing to me. At least their Mullahs don’t get carried shoulder high to prison, made a national hero after conviction for corruption and get the brains (in whom we can never trust) to try and sell the garbage the people of this country are asked to buy. **NOTE: Evidence of a crime or basis for prosecuting crime — huh - say what? **Transparency and disclosure — huh - say what? NPA, Judiciary and Police Force shall mean those instruments of government, ruling party or wealthy paid for by the moro … citizens and employed or utilised solely for the benefit of the government, ruling party or wealthy. What about the taxpayers? — huh - say what? Crime Statistics? — huh - say what? Kidnapping? — Not yet, we have a commission in Somalia learning how to do this and piracy. HOW DO WE SOLVE CRIME? — Same as always convene commissions who charge a fortune, resolve nothing and get outraged if they are expected to actually do any work. Most importantly ignore their findings — if any — and do what suits the wealthy and political expedient. Just to end with an apology — I really am sorry that we have the lamest most pathetic excuse for a criminal justice system on the planet right now. See I can be so so so sorry … maybe I’m getting in touch with my feminine side … becoming an Mpshe. Link - <a href="http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/traps/">http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/traps/</a>

What is or isn’t a Crime in South Africa

With all the pro-and-anti NPA articles doing the rounds I thought it best to give you some understanding of how the law works in South Afric...

7:54 AM

South Africa faces turmoil over Zuma

Fraud charges set to be dropped as poll chaos looms writes Fred Bridgland MULTIPLE CHARGES of corruption against Jacob Zuma, who is certain to be elected South Africa's new head of state in three weeks time, are to be dropped tomorrow following an emergency meeting of the state prosecuting agency.<img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5318512575737613858" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMVSiDEZfsuMiXtWyTnkEfE5ZzbXUkjOL2KKCXwUqWkQg6EgbkxWZVlB8dOu0jpdPgjcT7-9dIlpWxI35aB8V3Nol8WY6dMmC9M1k22673IUNXXKS8bqYrq61Q_bXjmjjgsxwFx7kjnOU/s400/cope-zuma.bmp" style="DISPLAY: block; MARGIN: 0px auto 10px; WIDTH: 400px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 283px; TEXT-ALIGN: center" />The decision will plunge the country into political turmoil ahead of the April 22 general election - the fourth post-apartheid poll - with suggestions in all publications that Zuma has submitted evidence that former President Thabo Mbeki received bribes in connection with the country's contentious £5.5billion arms deal with West European weapons manufacturers. <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhWqGnGEb0h5uuxGIiQfaxoLgB5Kt3-3vcdxDQ_KpHT7NHAaHlST9sbV1KGP8UZDfyS6IZ8ky5i3AUa8sbuDy2JxpHYJjXgpersiJ1DfQaM2XVFtdfdZK5hdBhQf8CdVxo13ZmVTtUboqs/s1600-h/zumatello.bmp"></a>Zuma, 66, was due to go on trial in August on nearly 800 counts of corruption, fraud, racketeering, money laundering and tax evasion in connection with the arms deal, under which the country is being equipped with advanced warplanes, frigates, submarines and other equipment. British Aerospace, which is being investigated by the UK's fraud squad in connection with the deal, provided Hawk trainer jets and Gripen fighter-bombers, built in collaboration with Sweden's Saab. Helen Zille, leader of the country's main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, said the decision by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), will set a precedent that individuals in power are "above the law and can bully their way out of trouble". Karima Brown, political editor of Business Day, the country's leading upmarket daily, said tomorrow's NPA meeting will be tumultuous as the country's acting prosecution chief Mokotedi Mpshe shares with his staff "devastating" information presented by Zuma's lawyers which makes a prosecution "impossible". Investigators who have spent eight years gathering information on Zuma's alleged crimes feel deeply betrayed by the impending decision, said Ms Brown, quoting an NPA source. The reports said Zuma's lawyers had submitted tapes, presumed to be recorded by one of the competing branches of South Africa's intelligence services, showing a political conspiracy against Zuma was plotted by former president Mbeki. Mbeki was deposed as head of state last September as the result of an internal power struggle within the ruling African National Congress (ANC). Among a number of allegations said to be contained in the tapes according to the daily Johannesburg Star <a href="http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=3268&fArticleId=vn20090329074848638C577975" title="NPA to drop Zuma charges">NPA to drop Zuma charges</a> <a class="FeatureLinks" href="http://www.thestar.co.za/?fSectionId=&fArticleId=vn20090327131019873C225737" title="'If we drop Zuma charges, NPA may reveal why'">'If we drop Zuma charges, NPA may reveal why'</a> is a devastating conversation between Mbeki and the former head of the investigations unit of the NPA, Leonard McCarthy, who recently became head of the World Bank's anti-corruption unit on Mbeki's recommendation. The timing of the announcement of tomorrow's NPA decision will be crucial, given the impending election and the fact that it is likely to be the closest run since Nelson Mandela became South Africa's first black head of state in 1994. Political commentators in several publications will have to give detailed reasons for dropping of charges against Zuma, who was said to have received hundreds of bribes connected to the arms deal from financier Schabir Shaik, who was imprisoned for 15 years in 2005 on corruption charges but paroled for "health" reasons last month. Zuma's battle with the state has dominated the political landscape in South Africa for several years. His victory will raise serious questions about the independence of the prosecuting authorities and other branches of the legal system. The looming controversy over the dropping of charges against Zuma comes as a debate rages over the ANC government's ban on the Dalai Lama attending a peace conference in Johannesburg last Friday designed to promote next year's World Cup Finals, being hosted by South Africa. The peace conference was cancelled after the Dalai Lama's fellow Nobel peace laureates Nelson Mandela, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former president FW de Klerk refused to attend after learning of the Tibetan spiritual leader's ban. The Dalai Lama was banned from attending after protests from Beijing and alleged payments by the Chinese government into the ANC's election coffers. Finance minister Trevor Manuel justified the ban, saying: "Who is the Dalai Lama? I've heard him described as a God and Buddha. To say anything against him is, in some quarters, equivalent to trying to shoot Bambi." Manuel is expected to be the country's next vice president. Archbishop Tutu, who was at the forefront of the anti-apartheid movement, said the ANC government had "lost the plot" with the ban, adding that the world's press were "saying we are dirt."

South Africa faces turmoil over Zuma

Fraud charges set to be dropped as poll chaos looms writes Fred Bridgland MULTIPLE CHARGES of corruption against Jacob Zuma, who is certain ...

12:11 AM

Convicted fraudster and Arms Deals conspirator Schabir Shaik gets R5m from state in “secret” deal

<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4kcW3RNry5JBhM38yqTSaL0VkykoPrTnGKsJcndMtDvv-QXh5nIe1wXsjYsHdfN3uGRmvR-RSLpmyFfPDAqdBoOZ13qSfPTgEcncvhjQIgr-VzYPmbSapFXNaxaPpChyBy7ccVGtyNKM/s1600-h/NPA-SA.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5294245084094048546" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4kcW3RNry5JBhM38yqTSaL0VkykoPrTnGKsJcndMtDvv-QXh5nIe1wXsjYsHdfN3uGRmvR-RSLpmyFfPDAqdBoOZ13qSfPTgEcncvhjQIgr-VzYPmbSapFXNaxaPpChyBy7ccVGtyNKM/s400/NPA-SA.jpg" style="FLOAT: left; MARGIN: 0px 10px 10px 0px; WIDTH: 300px; CURSOR: hand; HEIGHT: 200px" /></a>Schabir Shaik has received a R5-million windfall from the state in terms of a "secret" agreement signed late in 2008 between his lawyer and the government. In what is believed to be an unprecedented move, the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) has agreed to split the interest on Shaik's ill-gotten gains. Shaik is serving a 15-year sentence for his corrupt relationship with Jacob Zuma. The Star has also established that Zuma's ex-financial adviser has not given up his fight to get back the R34-million confiscated from him and his Nkobi group of companies. It emerged in papers filed with the Durban High Court this week that Shaik has applied to President Kgalema Motlanthe for the "reprieve and remission of the confiscated amounts". A decision on this is still pending, it is stated. The Durban court papers reveal a settlement agreement signed by Shaik's lawyer, Reeves Parsee, and the NDPP, which settles a dispute over who is entitled to the interest on the seized R34-million that accrued while Shaik launched various court challenges to the confiscation order. With about R14-million interest at stake, the row was headed to court. But late in 2008, in terms of a negotiated settlement, made an order of court, the parties agreed to split the interest, giving Shaik R5-million in cash. This was after the state deducted about R2-million that Shaik had been advanced to pay for his two unsuccessful legal bids to overturn the asset forfeiture order. While the agreement was not stamped "confidential", one of its terms was that it was to be kept secret, with "no public announcements" without the prior written approval of the other party. However, the agreement was attached to a report recently submitted to the court by Trevor White, the curator tasked by the court to administer and oversee the forfeiture to the state of about R34-million that Judge Hilary Squires found to be the profit from his corrupt relationship with Zuma. The money has been gaining interest since January 2006 while Shaik unsuccessfully attempted to overturn the forfeiture order in both the Supreme Court of Appeal and the Constitutional Court. In terms of the deal struck with the NDPP, Shaik agreed to pay the money back if his court attempts were unsuccessful. In return for the cash to pay for lawyers, Shaik put up his CellSaf shares as security. According to White's report, these shares have been given back to him, and the legal fees have been deducted from his half of the R14-million interest, leaving him with R5-million, which was paid into his attorney's account last month. White said this left R41-million in the account, which would be paid into the criminal asset recovery account once his fees and costs had been approved and deducted. The attached settlement agreement notes, however, that in the event of Shaik's application to the president succeeding entirely or partially, he reserved his right to reclaim the entire amount. DA poses tough questions The Democratic Alliance (DA) is deeply concerned by newspaper reports indicating that a secret deal has been concluded to pay a sum of R5 million to convicted fraudster and Arms Deals conspirator Schabir Shaik. The DA believes that the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) needs to make it expressly clear why such a deal was concluded, how it serves the interests of justice, why it was conducted in secrecy, and upon what basis the NPA decided to conclude a negotiated settlement rather than allow the matter to be determined in court. We believe that the agreement, if these reports are accurate, is outrageous and makes a mockery out of our justice system. It seems patently obvious that if an initial sum is forfeited, then any subsequent earnings on that amount ought to be forfeited too. It is worth bearing in mind, too, that the sum of money in question is interest accrued on transactions right at the heart of the Arms Deal controversy. The initial figure of approximately R34.5 million reportedly included: * The R250 000 bribe paid by Thales into Shaik’s Kobitech account, disguised as a so-called “service provider agreement”, but ostensibly intended for Jacob Zuma. * R21 million shares in African Defence Systems (ADS) - the company that won the tender to supply Arms Deal corvettes with information management systems. * ADS dividends valued at R12.7m. * R500 000 received by Nkobi Investments for the sale of its shares in Thint Holdings to Thales. It is utterly unacceptable that Shaik should now be allowed to profit from allegedly corrupt transactions. The DA will pose parliamentary questions to the Minister of Justice on this matter at the first available opportunity.

Convicted fraudster and Arms Deals conspirator Schabir Shaik gets R5m from state in “secret” deal

Schabir Shaik has received a R5-million windfall from the state in terms of a "secret" agreement signed late in 2008 between his l...

1:32 PM

South Africa P.I.G.