ANC WELCOMES NPA DECISION TO DROP CHARGES AGAINST ANC PRESIDENT JACOB ZUMA

The ANC welcomes the decision of the NPA to discontinue the criminal prosecution against Comrade President Jacob Zuma. This decision is a victory for the rule of law, decency and common sense - it is good for our nation, the ANC, and Comrade President Zuma's family. Comrade President has endured many years of relentless persecution from individuals with ulterior political motives. It is a matter of record that the NPA's failure to give Comrade Zuma his day in court was, a calculated strategy designed to frustrate the democratic will of the people who had voted for him. This was aimed at frustrating Comrade Zuma from becoming a President of the ANC and the country.

Comrade Zuma endured an ordeal that has never been experienced by any other citizen. For 8 long years he was subjected to trial by the media and in the court of public opinion, he was denied his constitutional right to equality, dignity, privacy, right of access to court and his right to an expeditious, fair and impartial trial in the court of law. The inhumane and undignified treatment that Comrade Zuma suffered at the hands of our state prosecutors was not only disgraceful it also brought our criminal justice into disrepute. Never again should we allow institutions of government to surrender their professional independence by engaging in parties and political battles. Never again should we allow persecution for one individual for such a long period of time.

The ANC has long cautioned our people that there was no case against Comrade Zuma; it correctly argued that he was also entitled to a presumption of innocent. We applaud the courageous decision of the NPA which is based on its exercise of professional judgement, the rule of law and prosecutorial independence. We urge all our people and the NPA to reject the naysayer and all who would unleash a vilification campaign against the NPA for narrow and shortsighted political gains.

The case was tainted from the start when the public prosecutor announced that there was a "prima facie case of corruption" against Zuma but that he would not prosecute because the case was "unwinnable". Judge Nicholson described this conduct as having brought our judicial system into disrepute. The NPA strategy was to use the case against Shaik as a trial by proxy against Comrade Zuma. In doing so, it denied Comrade Zuma his right to equality, dignity, privacy, presumption of innocence, fair trial and his right to access to a court to vindicate his rights.

Comrade Zuma was not the only casualty of this abuse of power. Our public institution, meant to protect citizens were deliberately rendered toothless and were too paralyzed to offer any assistance to Zuma. The public protector ruled that comrade Zuma was subjected to a selective prosecution in violation of his rights under Section 9 of the constitution and that his right to dignity and privacy were also violated. Sadly, the Public Protector's findings were ridicule and his recommendations as they relate to remedies for Comrade Zuma were ignored by both parliament and the executive.

The constitutional violations continued unabated. The judiciary failed to protect Comrade Zuma' rights by allowing a trial by proxy and directly violated his constitutional rights by falsely attributing statements such as "generally corrupt relationship" to Squires. The Shaik trial concluded with a guilty verdict for Shaik. Interestingly Mbeki selectively relied on the on the "judgement" of the Squires court but ignored the Public Protectors findings that the NPA conduct of the prosecution was in violation of Comrade Zuma's constitutional right.

The Khampepe Commission of Inquiry also found that this reflected a culture of impunity within the NPA. The honorable Judge (Khampepe) condemned the manner in which the DSO publicized its work to the media "FBI style" and concluded that "the DSO conducts its operations as though it were a law unto itself". It found such "conduct to be out of kilter with our constitution, reprehensible, unprofessional and corroding the public's confidence in the law enforcement agencies".

Convinced that its strategy has worked, the NPA filed criminal charges against Zuma within days of the Shaik verdict around June 2005. Everything was downhill from that point. The NPA's handling of the zuma prosecution has been the polar opposite of due diligence and constitutes gross abuse of our judicial system. After many delays, and almost fifteen months after preferring charges against comrade Zuma, the NPA told the trial Judge Msimang that it was not ready to proceed with its case. Exasperated with this lackadaisical attitude and the gross violations of Zuma's rights, Justice Msimang threw the case out of court. Justice Msimang indicated that the conduct of the NPA had serious implications for Zuma's fair trial rights and concluded that the prosecution's case had limped from one disaster to another.

Even after this severe admonition, the NPA took another fifteen months to complete a "draft indictment" and proceeded to institute yet another ill-fated prosecution against Zuma. Just before the pivotal ANC Polokwane conference, the NPA leaked its "draft indictment" to the media in an obvious attempt to influence the outcome of the ANC leadership contest. Judge Nicholson later found this conduct as another instance of political interference in the Zuma prosecution. After a detour at the Supreme Court of Appeals, the NPA would like everyone to believe that it was now ready to prosecute the matter diligently.

There are many good reasons why Zuma prosecution must be ended once and for all. Comrade Zuma has suffered undue prejudicial delay which renders a fair trial impossible. Judicial findings and the Public Protector reports show that the NPA was squarely to blame. The principle of justice delayed is justice denied has been violated. Zuma was subjected to the torture of public condemnation and has already suffered irreparable harm in that right under section 35 (3)(d) of the Constitution to have his "trial begin and conclude without unreasonable delay" has been violated.

The NPA abused its discretion and misused the court's process improperly for an official public smear of an individual. A trial that comes after such torture is unlawful and can never be deemed fair by any standards. The nature or ordinary remedy for a breach of the reasonable time or access to court provision is a permanent stay. If the court were to direct that Zuma's trial proceed forthwith (notwithstanding the constitutional violations), it would be contradicting the accepted rule of natural justice and the inordinate delay had denied Zuma a fair trial: it would amount to the Court's participation in a further violation of Zuma's rights.

Indeed, the Zuma case has all the hallmarks of a vindictive politically motivated prosecution. In resurrecting the case, the NPA has added thirteen additional charges. A prosecutor violates due process when he brings additional or more severe charges under circumstances where he appears to punish the defendant for exercising a constitutional or statutory right. This form of retaliatory or vindictive prosecution is a violation of a constitution and must be stopped.

The NPA pursued a cloak and dagger strategy - despite its sworn promise to the court that it would be ready to put Zuma on a trial by the end of 2006, the NPA assiduously avoided an indictment of Zuma. The NPA issued press releases, and well-calculated leaks generated rumours about Zuma's political future and milked the subsequent adverse publicity against Zuma for what it was worth. It concentrated on a media campaign until the ANC Polokwane conference was over.

A combination of all the above indicate clearly that what we have is a political trial aimed at frustrating Jacob Zuma and the express will of the members of the ANC. It is evident that the NPA, the executive branch of our government and the judiciary have all sanctioned a judicial lynching process all in violation of Comrade Jacob Zuma's rights.

The Zuma prosecution has now become so unwieldy and prohibitively expensive. The price tag for comrade Zuma's defence is an estimated R10.7 million cost to the South African taxpayers. The prosecution is estimated to have cost 100 million rands. Private advocates charging exorbitant fees were brought under the pretext of prosecutions of select high profile cases. The neutrality that is essential to a fair outcome for the litigants in the case is expediently dispensed with. The main beneficiary is attorneys that stand to make tons of money the longer the prosecution drags on.

Having listened to the NPA, it will be logical to appear in court urgently and formally withdraw the charges.

We supported the Judiciary Commission of enquiry into the cases of omissions that tainted the process.

They must close this chapter and move on.

We thank our people for the support throughout the trying times.

Statement issued by Gwede Mantashe Secretary General of the African National Congress, April 6 2009

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter