MK Party president Jacob Zuma has thrown his deputy, Dr Mandlakayise John Hlophe, under the bus – accusing him of unilaterally changing lawyers, causing the party’s humiliating defeat in the organisation’s court case against its Mpumalanga convener Mary Phadi.
In a blistering affidavit before the Mbombela High Court, Zuma reveals that Hlophe sidelined the party’s official lawyers, KMNS Inc, and instructed a different law firm, Xulu Attorneys, to handle the case – a move Zuma says he knew nothing about.
This resulted in a catastrophic legal blunder that saw MKP failing to oppose Phadi’s first court application, allowing her to secure a default judgment reinstating her as both an MKP member, provincial convener and leader of the party in the Mpumalanga provincial legislature. Phadi was restored in all positions after approaching the Mbombela High Court last December following her expulsion from the party.
“In the new year and unbeknownst to the secretary-general, the deputy president, out of genuine concern, gave instructions to a separate firm of attorneys… which was never followed up,” Zuma stated under oath. “Any genuine confusion… was resolved… but no prejudice was suffered by any party as a result thereof.”
But the damage was already done. It was only after the court granted Phadi an interim order that Zuma and the party discovered the catastrophic error. Worse, the party learned of the court order from media reports, not from their legal team.
Zuma makes it clear that Hlophe’s decision was neither sanctioned by him nor by now axed secretary-general Floyd Shivambu. Hlophe, the former Western Cape judge president, had acted completely outside of his mandate.
While Zuma attempts to downplay the crisis by claiming “no prejudice was suffered”, his affidavit concedes that the legal fumble left the party cornered, forcing them to accept the court order.
“The advice MKP received from KMNS attorneys and counsel was that… it would be a costly and potentially lengthy exercise to seek a rescission or reconsideration… The MKP, therefore, reluctantly accepted this advice and the reality of the court outcome.”
Had the party simply stuck with KMNS from the start – the very lawyers Zuma himself had appointed – the MKP might have blocked Phadi’s legal fight at the first hurdle. Instead, the legal own goal allowed Phadi to legally force her way back into the legislature, exposing deep dysfunction in MK’s leadership.
Zuma’s affidavit forms part of the party’s urgent counter-application, which seeks to remove Phadi from the party and compel the Mpumalanga legislature to remove her from her seat.
Interestingly, the counter-application has dropped earlier allegations of financial misconduct and misuse of party funds that were initially levelled at Phadi. The focus now is on her alleged insult of Shivambu, after she used the isiZulu proverb “Sishaya inja kuphume umnikazi” (we beat the dog until its owner comes out) during a political fallout.
The case was supposed to be heard in the Mbombela High Court on Monday, but Phadi’s lawyers found that it was not enrolled on either the opposed or the unopposed roll.
Following Monday’s chaos, the counter-application has now been officially postponed to July 8.
Hlophe, once seen as MK’s legal brain because he is a former judge, now finds himself at the centre of the party’s biggest legal embarrassment to date.
What makes this legal bungle even more scandalous is the deeply personal – and bitter – history between Hlophe and Phadi. In a previous letter to Zuma, Phadi accused Hlophe of making sexual advances towards her during a meeting at The Capital Hotel in Mbombela on August 4, 2024.
When she rejected him, Phadi claims, a campaign to tarnish her reputation began and culminated in her receiving a notice of suspension weeks later. “I am being vilified and victimised since I refused to give in to his attempts of spending the night with him as favours,” she wrote to Zuma.
Her refusal, she alleged, triggered the very political battles that eventually spilt into court.
When the MKP moved to expel Phadi, she argued the decision was a direct consequence of her rebuffing Hlophe’s coital advances. Although she did not advance these reasons in her case, Mbombela High Court ruled that her expulsion was unconstitutional and ordered her reinstatement.
Hlophe has vehemently denied the allegations, but the issue has since become something no one in the party wants to discuss further, including Phadi herself.
The internal dynamics of MKP continue, with the party now scrambling to clean up the legal mess, filing a fresh counter-application to have Phadi booted out once and for all.
Whether Hlophe’s career inside MK survives is a question only time – and perhaps Zuma – can answer.
