The entire country knew that the NPA was investigating Jacob Zuma. The NPA has now taken a decision to prosecute him.
The entire country knew that the NPA was investigating Jacob Zuma. The NPA has now taken a decision to prosecute him.
We all remember that in September 2006 Judge Herbert Msimang struck the case off the roll because the NPA said it was still investigating the diary in Mauritius and off-shore accounts.
The NPA also asked for postponement because Zuma's lawyers had appealed against the search and seizure of documents by the NPA.
Before the ANC conference, the NPA indicated it was ready to take the case back to court.
There are principles that we, as members of the ANC, must uphold even under difficult conditions.
The first one is that nobody, irrespective of social status, is above the law. The second one is that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
The other one is that in a constitutional state like ours, it is the NPA that must prove that Zuma is guilty of an offence.
To do that, the NPA must take the matter to court. It, therefore, offers an opportunity for Zuma to explain in detail his relationship with Schabir Shaik and Thint.
The fourth one is that the ANC has long committed itself to the rule of law.
As democrats, we must, therefore, wait for the court to pronounce itself on the matter.
Siyanda Mhlongo, KwaDukuza
Let court decide on this case
The entire country knew that the NPA was investigating Jacob Zuma. The NPA has now taken a decision to prosecute him.
The entire country knew that the NPA was investigating Jacob Zuma. The NPA has now taken a decision to prosecute him.
We all remember that in September 2006 Judge Herbert Msimang struck the case off the roll because the NPA said it was still investigating the diary in Mauritius and off-shore accounts.
The NPA also asked for postponement because Zuma's lawyers had appealed against the search and seizure of documents by the NPA.
Before the ANC conference, the NPA indicated it was ready to take the case back to court.
There are principles that we, as members of the ANC, must uphold even under difficult conditions.
The first one is that nobody, irrespective of social status, is above the law. The second one is that a person is innocent until proven guilty.
The other one is that in a constitutional state like ours, it is the NPA that must prove that Zuma is guilty of an offence.
To do that, the NPA must take the matter to court. It, therefore, offers an opportunity for Zuma to explain in detail his relationship with Schabir Shaik and Thint.
The fourth one is that the ANC has long committed itself to the rule of law.
As democrats, we must, therefore, wait for the court to pronounce itself on the matter.
Siyanda Mhlongo, KwaDukuza
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending
Latest Videos