Former president Zuma has filed an answering affidavit to oppose the urgent interdict of president Cyril Ramaphosa

In a media statement released by the Jacob Zuma foundation on the 6th of January 2023, it stated that president Zuma filed an affidavit opposing the urgent interdict of ramaphosa.

Zuma delivered his opposing papers in response to the urgent application of president ramaphosa which will be heard in the labour High Court on Tuesday the 10th of January 2023.

The president Cyril Ramaphosa urgent application is aimed at asking the court to exempt him from the law which compels all criminally accused persons in South Africa to appear in person during their court hearings.

Zuma found it an unusual and unprecedented request by a person who has no illness or other reason other than him being the president of the country. Zuma opposes the application on the basis that according to The principle of equality before law ramaphosa must be treated like all other criminally charged and accused persons. He believes the preferential treatment he seeks is improper.

In addition, H.E Zuma deems the application a waste of the courts’ time and state resources. Zuma states that firstly, there is no reason why the state attorney is involved in a criminal case and secondly, the application is not urgent.

The statement issued read that there is no reason why ramaphosa cannot raise his concerns including questioning the private prosecutors title to prosecute before the judge who will be sitting in his criminal trial starting on the 19th January within days of the unnecessary urgent application. that is how it is normally done.

MEDIA STATEMENT

H.E PRESIDENT ZUMA HAS FILED AN ANSWERING AFFIDAVIT TO OPPOSE THE URGENT INTERDICT OF PRESIDENT RAMAPHOSA.#PrivateProsecution pic.twitter.com/thtrw30TGl

— JGZuma Foundation (Official) (@JGZ_Foundation) January 6, 2023

It has also emerged that the application is defective and invalid because the affidavit filed by ramaphosa is non compliant with the application regulations issued by the president of South Africa which have been in place for decades. He said that such sloppiness should not have came from the high office of the president.

In regards of the merits of the case, the case is totally hopeless in that the accused person has so many alternative remedies in the South African law including section 106 of the Criminal Procedure Act and many other similar avenues.

Zuma also said that it is clear from his application that the president and his advisers do not understand the concept of an accessory often the fact that, for an example, they complained that his involvement and alleged conduct took place after the conduct of the perpetrator and he’s accomplice., but it is exactly a legal requirement for an accessory, that the alleged conduct must occur after the main crime hence the word after the definition of the crime.

The next issue that was raised was the concerns of the big lie told by the NPA in the public domain that President Ramaphosa is “not mentioned” in the police docket. This is clearly false.

President Zuma has furnished the Court with documentary proof of where President Ramaphosa is mentioned on three separate occasions in the docket. The complaint affidavit also calls for the addition of other suspects after the police investigation. In any event the NPA itself has ironically confirmed in its media release that the nolle prosequi certificate covers persons who are mentioned in the docket.

This clearly includes Mr Ramaphosa.

The statement continued including that the conduct of the NPA officials involved in this matter, including the NDPP is nothing short of disgraceful. In a normal democracy she would be forced to resign or questioned by a vigilant media for turning her back on the sacred values of prosecutorial independence.

H.E Zuma said that the NPA should hang its head in shame following the episode. The conduct of the NPA undermines the entire criminal justice system.

Media theatrics aside it will soon be clear that there is no place for Mr Ramaphosa to hide from the long arm of the law. He faces 15years imprisonment, if convicted. For now, he is a criminally charged and accused individual and must be treated as such.

On the positive side, they welcomed the fact that  President Ramaphosa had finally accepted that he is a criminally accused person and that he has no right to “ignore” criminal summons unless it has been set aside by the Court of law. This is a victory for democracy and rule of law.

As the legal team of H,E President Zuma previously advised him free of charge that the well-established Oudekraal rule applies to him like all other people.

H.E President Zuma today also rejected a proposal by President Ramaphosa for the indefinite postponement of his criminal trial on 19 January 2023 to take place in the absence of the Accused.

He pointed out that in terms of section 158 of the Criminal Procedure Act “all criminal proceedings in any court shall take place in the presence of the accused”. The Private Prosecutor is therefore in no position to enter into side agreements with a criminally accused person to breach the law. The proposal was rejected, inter alia, on those grounds.

To conclude, the media statement released stated that the stage was therefore set for a big test for our democracy and our judiciary which we are optimistically confident will be equal to the task of dispensing justice without fear, favour or prejudice as it says in the Constitution.