Former president Jacob Zuma has filed his application for the recusal of deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo as head of the state capture inquiry, just days before the former head of state had been subpoenaed to appear before him.
The filing of Zuma’s application, which is understood to be 100 pages long, comes after the inquiry’s secretary, Itumeleng Mosala, warned Zuma’s attorney, Eric Mabuza, on Wednesday that even if such an application were filed, the former president was still expected to appear for his scheduled appearance on Monday.
“He is required to be in compliance with the summons as his legal team moves whatever application they may be instructed to move on his behalf. The commission has considered it important to make this clear ahead of Monday, November 16.”
In response, Mabuza told Mosala: “We want to remind you, professor, that you have no authority whatsoever to warn President Zuma of anything.”
“We take strong exception to the condescending tone of your letter and your attempt to bully us or President Zuma. Your conduct is completely unnecessary and uncalled for.”
Mosala has also told Mabuza that the inquiry was “considering its options” with regard to Zuma’s as yet unexplained failure to provide information sought from him about the Passenger Rail Agency of SA and Eskom. He added that that failure to comply with Zondo’s directives amounted to a criminal offence.
While Zuma’s lawyer has previously stated that he believed Zondo was “biased” against him, Mabuza has now told Mosala that the “deputy chief justice has never treated us with the disrespect you show us”.
We want to remind you, professor, that you have no authority whatsoever to warn President Zuma of anything
“If anything, your conduct will only serve to harden attitudes in this delicate matter.”
What this apparent conflict means for Zuma’s scheduled appearance on Monday remains to be seen, but it does appear that Zuma and his lawyers will attend the hearing. What's uncertain is how Zondo and inquiry lawyers will respond to the recusal application, which is likely to end up in court if Zondo refuses it.
In October, Zondo granted an application by inquiry lawyers to compel Zuma to attend the hearing between November 16 and 20 and face questions about the testimony of at least 34 witnesses, who they believe have implicated him in wrongdoing.
Zuma has previously contended that there was no real evidence against him and argued that many of those who took the stand against him were bitter that he had fired them, and used the commission to “vent” their frustrations.
Zuma remains adamant that state capture does not exist and is part of a “political narrative” designed to undermine his nine years in office.
The inquiry, however, maintains that Zuma, as head of state during the period in which rampant looting of state coffers occurred, is an important witness whose evidence is central to its work.
After Zondo granted the inquiry’s subpoena application, Zuma’s lawyers announced that he would seek the deputy chief justice’s recusal.
Mosala subsequently sought assurances from Mabuza that Zuma would still honour the summons. Mosala further warned that the inquiry “may have to resort to approaching the Constitutional Court” to ensure that Zuma does so.
“It is hoped that this will not be necessary”.
In a response sent last week, Mabuza stated: “President Zuma has not indicated to the commission or to us that he plans to defy the summons. We will not tamper with your belief that the Constitutional Court has jurisdiction to enforce a summons. It may well be that the commission is privy to information about which we are not aware,” he added.
Mosala, it appears, was unconvinced by that answer.
“This does not tell the commission what your client’s instructions are as to whether or not he will comply with the summons. It is simply what he has not told you. I now write to ask you to take instructions and tell us whether your client will or will not comply with the summons,” he stated.
Mosala then told Mabuza that, should he not receive such a response by noon on Wednesday, “I will assume that your client does not intend to comply with the summons.”
It was in response to this letter that Mabuza told Mosala that he had no right to “warn” Zuma that his recusal application was “not a valid reason” for him to defy Zondo’s subpoena.
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.