Jacob Zuma is a name that has become synonymous with relentless legal manoeuvring.
The former president’s ongoing battle in the arms deal trial, which could see him behind bars, has led to a string of delays and appeals.
It is becoming increasingly evident that Zuma, now 81 years old, is also nursing poor health on top of fighting for his freedom.
He is also fighting against the inevitable exhaustion that comes with his unyielding delaying tactics.
His recent appearance at the Pietermaritzburg High Court this week painted a grim picture. The toll of the legal battle has not only affected his political reputation but also his wellbeing.
One cannot help but wonder if Zuma, who slept through the proceedings, grasps the complexities of the courtroom drama anymore.
Stalingrad strategy
Zuma faces 18 counts of corruption, money-laundering, tax evasion, and racketeering.
He is also accused of accepting annual bribes from French arms firm Thales during his time as deputy president and later as president.
The legal wrangling surrounding these charges seems never-ending with the former president being accused of employing the Stalingrad strategy to evade justice.
The recent accusations of bias against the senior prosecutor in his case, Billy Downer, and alleged unethical conduct related to the leaking of Zuma’s medical records, have added more layers to this intricate legal web.
While some argue that the relentless pursuit of these issues is appalling, it is a strategy deeply rooted in his right to a fair trial, no one can deny him that.
The blame for the delays in this protracted legal saga cannot solely be laid at Zuma’s door step.
During the proceedings on Thursday, Zuma’s legal team argued that if Downer had recused himself when allegations of bias first arose, the case might have proceeded more smoothly and would possibly be nearing its completion by now.
Ethical, professional considerations
Ethical and professional considerations, they assert, should take precedence. However, the state contends that Zuma has undeniably adopted a Stalingrad approach.
It’s not a matter of which specific delay can be attributed to him but the principal pattern of his strategy – a pattern that the courts have recognised.
The Stalingrad defence is, in essence, a tactic designed to wear down the opposition, and it has indeed been effective in creating prolonged legal battles. Zuma knows what he is doing.
As the legal battle continues, the former statesman faces the harsh reality that he cannot afford to give in, even if he is physically battered.
The spectre of a possible prison sentence looms, and Zuma’s determination to fight on persists. It is a testament to his belief in his claimed innocence.
The high court on Thursday reserved its judgment in the Downer matter. While others argue that Zuma has no case, his sedulous nature will not let him give in.
It remains to be seen whether this exhaustive battle will ever reach its conclusion.
