Flaws in Zuma ruling

It is astonishing that the Jacob Zuma camp seems to believe that Judge Chris Nicholson's ruling was reasonable when he accused the presidency of interfering with the NPA's duties in the ANC president's corruption case.

It is astonishing that the Jacob Zuma camp seems to believe that Judge Chris Nicholson's ruling was reasonable when he accused the presidency of interfering with the NPA's duties in the ANC president's corruption case.

In fact, the judge must be held accountable for making a political ruling. Most of his references were based on allegations from the print media and the ANC's Polokwane conference.

The fact that the NPA reinstated the charges against Zuma just after the Polokwane conference does not affirm that it was an act of retaliation from the Mbeki camp. The judge had no proof of that and he simply asserted his assumption.

In this case the NPA is to blame for a lack of professionalism in failing to translate the Prosecution Act, which has resulted in the prolonged investigation.

Former NPA boss Bulelani Ngcuka must also be blamed as the cause of the whole saga. The judge shouldn't have cited the ANC Polokwane conference outcome as proof of political interference.

Political interference in the NPA's duties is a crime and anyone accepting Judge Nicholson's ruling must therefore institute charges against the president and some of his cabinet ministers.

Jabulani Makhanya, Alexandra

X