Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
Former South African president Jacob Zuma will face prosecution on corruption charges that haunted much of his term in office the country’s chief prosecutor has said.
Zuma is accused of taking kickbacks from the $5 billion (€4.1 billion) purchase of fighter jets, patrol boats and other arms, manufactured by five European firms, including British military equipment maker BAE Systems and French company Thales.
National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) spokesman Luvuyo Mfaku confirmed to AFP that Thales would also face prosecution, alongside Zuma. Thales declined to make any immediate comment.
“After consideration of the matter I am of the view there are reasonable prospects of a successful prosecution of Mr Zuma on the charges listed in the indictment,” National Director of Public Prosecutions Shaun Abrahams told a media briefing in Pretoria.
Zuma will face one count of racketeering, two counts of corruption, one of money laundering and 12 counts of fraud – all of which can carry lengthy custodial sentences on conviction.
“I am of the view that a trial court would be the most appropriate forum for these issues to be ventilated and to be decided upon,” said Abrahams.
Prosecutors declined to confirm what charges Thales would face. “We don’t want to be prosecuting people in the media,” said Mfaku. “That will come out in court.”
The former president could now appeal the ruling on a number of grounds and argue that the decision is illegitimate.
In December, the High Court in Pretoria ordered then-deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa to replace Abrahams, ruling that Zuma’s original decision to appoint him was “null and void” because he was “conflicted” at the time.
“Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done – I am mindful that everyone is equal before the law,” said Abrahams, who noted that “Mr Zuma disputes all allegations against him”.
“I don’t think Zuma can stay out of court – there’s too many charges hanging over him,” independent political analyst and author Nomavenda Mathiane told AFP ahead of the announcement.
Abrahams said that his department’s representatives in Zuma’s home region of KwaZulu-Natal “will facilitate the necessary processes for Mr Zuma and his co-accused to appear in court”.
Last year, a court ruled against a decision by prosecutors in 2009 to drop the corruption charges against Zuma just months before he became president, laying the path to today’s announcement.
‘Innocent until proven guilty’
Zuma’s criminal charges relate to an arms procurement deals struck by the government in the late 1990s and from which he is accused of profiting corruptly to the tune of four million rand ($345,000, €280,000).
State prosecutors previously justified dropping the case by saying that tapped phone calls between officials in then-president Thabo Mbeki’s administration showed undue interference.
In 2005 Zuma’s former financial adviser Schabir Shaik was convicted for facilitating bribes over the contracts and sentenced to 15 years in prison. He was later released on medical parole.
Shaik told the local TimesLive online news website that he had been subpoenaed‚ “so I must testify”.
“I think the law must take its course,” he told News24.
Zuma resigned as president last month after the ruling African National Congress (ANC) party threatened to remove him from office.
The ANC noted today’s decision and called in a statement for “Comrade Jacob Zuma to be presumed innocent until, and if, proven guilty”.
The AfriForum campaign group, which has railed against corruption in South Africa’s democratic era, had threatened to privately prosecute Zuma if the NPA did not.
“The NPA’s decision to prosecute Zuma (is) not only a victory for AfriForum, but also for the principle of equality before the law,” said the group’s chief executive, Kallie Kriel.
In addition to the corruption scandals that dogged his time in office, Zuma had been under fire for his handling of the economy, which has been battered by falling economic growth and record unemployment.
The opposition Democratic Alliance (DA) party has campaigned since 2009 to reactivate the charges.
“It doesn’t matter who you are, whether you are the president, in whatever office you hold, accountability must be effective and justice will be met,” said DA leader Mmusi Maimane.
“He must have his day in court… We will see him in orange overalls.”
Zuma’s successor Ramaphosa has vowed to tackle corruption, admitting it was a major problem in the previous government.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
After going out to do a days work you expect to return home to your family……….
One of the most dangerous calls a police officer can respond to is a domestic incident. When police arrive they are dealing with two emotionally charged individuals. They then have to step in and try to restore peace or separate them. The police can then have both people turn on them. Sad to hear this incident end so tragically.
@Wingah Boffah: definitely and according to article was regular arguments at address they probably so used to calling and no trouble towards them that guard was down and didn’t expect it very sad and a domestic not like crime the centenary and to kill 2 officers over it
Why is so many articles having comments closed..charities missing funds?senior Garda death?etc,,,
@Tomas: Because the Journal is pro-government?
@Paul Culligan: thejournal are pro Leo not pro-fine gael.
@Tomas:
The risk of people being libelled with regard to the Oxfam scandal and respect for the family of the garda who died in Ballymun because it was probably suicide.
@Tomas: It’s a business and they have no financial incentive to host potentially libelous comments since those unhappy with it will just moan about it for a bit rather than actually stop visiting.
@Rochelle: They have no problem when it comes to SF stories, I’d say its almost encouraged on this site.
@Ciarán Masterson: I suppose there worried about there also worried about Kinahan investments in hotels,
Journal.ie…..open for comment? How thoughtful but you’re good at double standard
@Thosj Carroll: out of interest; do you want this comment section closed, or the other one opened? Can you really not see the difference between the two situations?
@Karen Wellington: I don’t need your lecture and I can look after myself ok
@Thosj Carroll: you could answer her question. She didn’t actually lecture you, she asked you two simple questions. Learn the difference or people might think you’re a little simple
@Ohhh_reeally: Ohhhhhhhhhj really……
Just another day in america.
@cp: yepp 400 million guns under their beds anyone can get one..i bet many americans would buy hand grenades for home security if they were allowed..
I wonder if the police officers had been lucky enough to shoot him first would the black lives matter brigade be out? America is a dangerous place for police officers.
@Michael Mclaughlin: Exactly
@Michael Mclaughlin: not if he had a gun which he clearly did. I wonder if he was white would you be even mentioning his race.
@Deborah Behan: if he were white, black lives matter wouldn’t give a s€?!.
@Michael Mclaughlin: guess what? He’s not white and they don’t give a shit. So what’s your point?
How would a wife-beater with a gun get the drop on two long-serving American cops?
Why didn’t Columbus PD sent a SWAT unit to the scene instead?
@Ciarán Masterson: Good question but SWAT unit doesn’t deal with domestic incident in first place. They deal with manhunt, terrorism, hijack….
@Thosj Carroll:
Agreed.
I was looking at the incident from an Irish point-of-view. Of course, most domestic violence fatalities in Ireland and the UK don’t involve the use of a firearm because of stricter gun law.
@Ciarán Masterson: “how would he get the drop”? Easy really, shoot them as the walk to the door is one way. There are several other ways but you’re probably too experienced in this type of situation for anyone to teach you.
@Ohhh_reeally:
Surely, American cops approaching a possibly violent situation take shelter beside the door and then burst in with their guns aiming outwards (Well, that’s what I see in “Blue Bloods”…Just saying!).
@Ciarán Masterson: ya. Hard to believe you’re an adult
For all the criticism of trump at least he has the constitution to publicly support his emergency services. Here they are used as political footballs
It’s crazy that this man who has multiple convictions for domestic abuse is still legally able to carry on his person a gun at all times! Crazy!
@Deborah Behan: Where did you get that he was allowed to legally hold a firearm from?
@Griff: well unless the police weren’t enforcing the law he was legally allowed to.
@Dave O Keeffe: Lack of enforcement doesn’t make a law void.
have your say