The Jacob G Zuma Foundation expressed its deep disappointment and firm protest against the recent High Court judgment that has once again demonstrated what it calls persistent injustices visited upon the former President.
Jacob Zuma was ordered to repay R28,9 million (plus interest) in legal fees that the state incurred in footing his legal bills.
The court action was brought on by the Democratic Alliance (DA).
In its own findings, the High Court held that the State acted unlawfully and unconstitutionally in relation to the payment of President Zuma’s legal fees. Yet, in a troubling contradiction, the Court proceeded to hold President Zuma personally liable for the consequences of that very unconstitutional conduct, said the Foundation in a statement released on Sunday.
“The Court’s reasoning, that H E President Zuma ‘benefited’ from the State’s unlawful
conduct, is fundamentally flawed. There can be no benefit where a citizen is now punished and made to pay for the State’s unconstitutional actions,” read the statement, adding that: “The undeniable fact is that President Zuma derived no benefit whatsoever from the payments made by the State, which are now being claimed from him.
Instead of applying the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) to hold the responsible officials accountable for unauthorised expenditure, the Court excused the State’s unconstitutional conduct and shifted the entire burden onto an innocent party.”
Absolve Zuma from blame
The Foundation said this approach reflects a concerning lack of balance and a failure to uphold the constitutional principles of fairness and accountability.
“Furthermore, the Court failed to exercise its broad constitutional discretion under section 172 of the Constitution, which empowers it to grant orders that are just and equitable when dealing with unconstitutional conduct. By granting the Democratic Alliance (DA) interest and attachment orders, relief previously denied by the Full Court, the Court ignored established jurisprudence and fairness,” added the statement.
The statement further stated that: “It Is neither just nor equitable to hold only President Zuma liable for the consequences of the State’s unlawful actions. A constitutionally compliant order would have recognised his rights and absolved him of any liability for conduct that was not his own. Indeed, HE President Zuma is entitled to consider pursuing a damages claim against the State for the immense financial and personal harm he continues to endure because of this injustice.”
Declining legal reasoning
The Foundation said it reiterates its concern about the declining quality of judicial reasoning and inconsistency in the application of constitutional principles, which undermines public confidence in the administration of justice. A judgment that holds a citizen financially responsible for the State’s unconstitutional conduct fails the most basic test of fairness and
justice.
“It is therefore deeply unjust that the Court found it ‘just and equitable’ to award the DA interest running into millions of rands and to authorise the attachment of President Zuma’s assets,” the Foundation argued.
