Zuma's abuses must stop, says Ramaphosa

President Cyril Ramaphosa says South Africans need urgent protection from former president Jacob Zuma and his “abuses”.

Ramaphosa had initiated proceedings in the Johannesburg high court in which he is seeking an urgent interdict stopping Zuma’s private prosecution of him ahead of a review  in which he wants the court to put a stop to it, once and for all, declaring the summonses issued to be unlawful and unconstitutional.

The president was served with a summons to appear in court on January 19. Zuma claims he is an “accessory” to the alleged crimes he is pursuing against state advocate Billy Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan.

This relates to allegations they breached the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act by publicly disclosing a medical certificate used by Zuma’s lawyers in an application for an adjournment of his arms-deal related trial before judge Piet Koen in the Pietermaritzburg high court.

Both Downer and Maughan have filed applications to stop the private prosecutions.

Ramaphosa was served with the summons on the eve of the ANC’s national elective conference earlier this month.

Zuma claims he is entitled to prosecute the president privately based on a certificate of nolle prosequi (decline to prosecute) issued by the NPA in the case he laid against Downer and Maughan.

The NPA has confirmed the certificate did not apply to Ramaphosa.

However, according to an affidavit filed by Ramaphosa in his application set down for January 10, Zuma and his legal team refuse to back off.

The president said they are acting with an ulterior purpose because the summons does not set out any specific charge against him, does not name him and does not link him in any way to the alleged crime.

He said in August 2021 Zuma’s lawyers wrote to him requesting an urgent inquiry into the conduct of NPA officials around the handling of his medical certificate.

Ramaphosa responded that month, advising that he had referred the matter to the minister of justice and correctional services for possible referral to the Legal Practice Council.

“For well over a year there was no further correspondence, until December 15 I was served with the first summons.”

Ramaphosa said the first summons did not contain the required nolle prosequi certificate and the timing was “disconcerting”, given the pending conference and the ANC’s “step aside” policy.

“The ulterior purpose was to disqualify me from contesting the position of ANC president, and even if I succeeded, to attempt to have me step aside from the position on the basis that criminal proceedings are pending against me in a court of law.

“The law does not permit a private prosecution for ulterior purposes.”

Ramaphosa said his lawyers sent a letter to Zuma’s lawyers noting the defective summons. However, they refused an offer that he withdraw it with each party paying their own costs.

On December 21, Zuma issued a “new summons” and attached a certificate. Ramaphosa said this certificate does not apply to him, which has been confirmed by the NPA.

“Where the summonses are not underpinned by a nolle prosequi certificate that relates to me, the consequence is the alleged offences or charges were never placed before the NPA.

“The purported private prosecution constitutes an unconstitutional and impermissible attempt at bypassing the institution with the primary decision-making power, in other words the NPA, over criminal prosecutions.”

Ramaphosa said in any event the medical certificate had been disclosed as part of the ordinary publication of court documents.

He said Zuma had also not put up the required proof that he has lodged a security deposit with the court’s registrar.

“It would be a serious injustice to permit Mr Zuma to commence the private prosecution or continue with it by requiring me to appear in court on January 19 2023 pending the outcome of my [constitutional] challenge.

“It will not only unduly interfere with my duties as president but would severely breach my right to dignity and equal protection of the law and cause me significant reputational harm.”

Ramaphosa said Zuma had refused to withdraw the summons, and if he were required to appear in court this would permit him to “continue to trample on my constitutional rights and reputation”.

Further, he said, “the interests of the republic and its people must be urgently protected from Zuma’s abuse”.

He said he would seek punitive costs against Zuma or an order that his lawyers pay the costs from their own pockets.

“The abuse I have been subjected to requires the court’s immediate attention. His blatant disregard of the law and abuse of it for ulterior purposes significantly harms the rule of law and confidence in the rule of law. The impact of his conduct on confidence in the republic and in my office cannot be permitted to continue for one more day.”

Zuma has until January 3 to file an opposing affidavit.

TimesLIVE