Sending Jacob Zuma back to prison would be a death sentence, according to the Jacob Zuma Foundation, which said the former president has since tasked his lawyers to draft an opinion on his legal options.
This after the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ruled on Monday that Zuma must return to prison. Manyi said the SCA judgment is outrageous and is a further injustice to the former statesman, who has been subjected to imprisonment without trial.
“For the second time in so many years, the courts have convicted president Zuma and sentenced him to imprisonment without the benefit of a criminal trial, which is afforded to even the worst criminals,” said Manyi.
“One does not need to be a lawyer to understand the double jeopardy rule of law: a person cannot be punished twice for the same offence. The Constitutional Court stated in the case of Phaahla v Minister of Correctional Services that:
“Parole is still a manner of serving out one’s sentence. It is therefore still a punishment although a lesser one than imprisonment. It still amounts to a deprivation of liberty for a set period, albeit outside of prison.
“Parolees remain subject to the supervision and authority of the department [of correctional services] for the remainder of their sentence. That it mitigates a sentence of imprisonment does not detract from this.”
Manyi said if that is the law, it would be “a textbook case of judicial overreach” if Zuma’s sentence is resurrected, noting that if the law applies to all, it should equally apply to the embattled former president.
He said: “If that is indeed the law of South Africa, then on what legal basis can an expired and fully served sentence be resurrected from its grave by a court of law. At least when judge Matojane made the incorrect order to discount a part of the sentence, the jail term was still running.
“To impose further imprisonment after the expiry of a jail term is totally unheard of and it is indeed a textbook case of judicial overreach once again targeted at president Zuma as an individual.
“It would be outrageous and unacceptable in the case of any citizen of any democratic country. If all are indeed equal before the law, then it must be equally unacceptable even if that citizen happens to carry the name Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma. That is the essence of the equality clause in our constitution.”
On Tuesday, DA leader John Steenhuisen put feelers out for the Department of Correctional Services to decide on Zuma’s freedom, after the SCA ruled that his release on medical parole was unlawful.
Steenhuisen said the official opposition has written to the acting national commissioner of correctional services demanding him to send Zuma back in jail to complete his sentence.
“The DA yesterday sent a lawyer’s letter to acting national commissioner of correctional services, Mr MS Thobakgale, demanding that he confirms within 48 hours that he will ensure that Mr Jacob Zuma is returned by 17h00 on Friday, 25 November 2022, to the Estcourt correctional centre to serve out the remainder of his sentence,” said Steenhuisen.
Steenhuisen said Zuma must be taken back to prison by means of arrest, if he fails to do so voluntarily.
“The DA’s legal letter points out that Mr Zuma is obliged by order to immediately return to the Estcourt correctional centre, and if he fails to do so within reasonable time, the commissioner of correctional services is obliged to ensure that he is returned – by arrest if necessary.
“This case, National Commissioner of Correctional Services v Democratic Alliance, was brought by the DA because we are determined to ensure that the democratic principles of equality before the law and accountability are upheld.”
Zuma’s legal blow came at a controversial time when the governing party is gearing up for its 55th national conference, where new leadership will be elected. In September, Zuma raised his hand for the position of national chairperson, claiming that he had been approached by some branches to contest.
The former statesman confirmed in a statement at the time that if given the opportunity, he would not decline the position.
“I [also] wish to confirm that I have been approached by a number of cadres to make myself available for the position of national chairperson of the ANC, to contribute in the rebuilding of the organisation and to provide direction,” said Zuma at the time.
“I have indicated that I will be guided by the branches of the ANC and that I will not refuse such a call should they deem it necessary for me to serve the organisation again at that level or any other.”
Zuma had also endorsed Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, for president.
Without mentioning her name, he said no one can match Dlamini-Zuma’s competency for the job, maintaining that this has been his view since the 54th national elective conference when Ramaphosa was sworn in as the ruling party’s president.
Zuma’s wish for his ex-wife to lead the country holds no water though, as Ramaphosa has garnered much support from the branches to retain his position. Sunday World reported on Tuesday that Ramaphosa has received the nod from 2 037 branches while his challenger, Zweli Mkhize, was favored by 916 branches.
Dlamini-Zuma and her tourism counterpart Lindiwe Sisulu, who have both expressed a desire to unseat Ramaphosa, failed to make the cut. However, they can still be nominated from the floor of the elective conference, should they garner at least 25% of the votes.
But in Zuma’s view, Ramaphosa is corrupt. After his parole ended in October, the former president convened a media briefing in which he accused Ramaphosa of treason and corruption in the wake of the Phala Phala game farm scandal.
He referred to Ramaphosa’s farm as a “side hustle” which, according to him, is unethical. Zuma, who was found to be at the centre of the state capture project, said other former presidents had never been found in compromising situations with millions of dollars in their possession.
“Let us not beat about the bush about the neglect of constitutional duty that comes with abusing the office of the president to conduct private business. I am assuming that what president Ramaphosa has said about the many dollars under his bed or furniture is true – that he conducts private businesses while serving as president of our country,” Zuma said.
According to Zuma, the country has enough problems and cannot afford to have a president whose focus is divided. “Our country’s problems are too big for a president who is busy hustling on the side,” he said.
Also read: Knives are out for SA’s former stateman Jacob Zuma
Ramaphosa in pole position to retain ANC presidency
Ramaphosa is corrupt – Zuma
Follow @SundayWorldZA on Twitter and @sundayworldza on Instagram, or like our Facebook Page, Sunday World, by clicking here for the latest breaking news in South Africa. To Subscribe to Sunday World, click here.
