Former president Jacob Zuma's battle to avoid spending about a quarter of a century behind bars for alleged corruption was dealt a fresh blow after losing two of his best legal brains.
Business Day has established that neither senior advocate Mike Hellens nor advocate Dawie Joubert will continue acting for Zuma in his ongoing battle with the National Prosecuting Authority. He is is seeking permanent stay of prosecution to avoid corruption charges linked to the arms deal of the 1990s.
Zuma has been struggling to maintain his expensive team of lawyers since losing access to state funding. He fired his long-term confidant and attorney Michael Hulley in July 2018.
Prior to the withdrawal of state funds, Zuma was accused of using a so-called “Stalingrad” defence, which involves deploying legal diversion to stop his prosecution on charges of corruption, fraud, racketeering and money laundering relating to payments that landed his former financial adviser Schabir Shaik in jail.
Hellens referred all questions to Zuma’s attorney Daniel Mantsha, who declined to comment on the reasons for Hellens's and Joubert’s exit.
“We are focusing on preparations for the hearing of the former president’s permanent stay of prosecution application," he said, adding that advocate Muzi Sikhakhane will continue to lead Zuma's team.
The High Court in Pretoria ruled in December that an agreement for the state to cover Zuma's legal costs was invalid, and ordered him to repay millions of rands of taxpayer money used to fight his corruption charges for more than a decade.
Zuma, whose time in office was dogged by allegations of corruption and is subject of the Zondo inquiry into alleged state capture, has hit out at the decision to strip him of statefunding, which he said was part of a deliberate strategy to stop him from fighting his case.
He has also taken issue with the state hiring some of SA's most high-profile lawyers to argue its case against him. The NPA's team includes advocates Wim Trengove, Andrew Breytenbach and Gilbert Marcus.
In papers filed at the Durban High Court this week, Zuma maintains that he has suffered politically motivated mistreatment at the hands of the NPA and that failure to charge him with his erstwhile adviser 15 years ago denied him the opportunity to defend himself against charges that he had been corrupted by Shaik.
The Durban High Court found in 2005 that Shaik had kept the then MEC, and later deputy president, on a corrupt retainer in order to do his bidding. Shaik was also found guilty of facilitating a R500,000-a-year bribe for Zuma from French arms company Thales, in exchange for political protection from any inquiry related to the arms deal.
Zuma denies any wrongdoing, and argues that his ability to fight his case has been defined by “inequality of arms” due to the NPA having hired "well-established senior senior counsel practitioners in private practice" to help its prosecutors.
His permanent stay of prosecution application is scheduled to be heard in May. Zuma is also challenging the stopping of his legal funding at the Supreme Court of Appeal.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.