[ad_1]
Former President Jacob Zuma’s latest offer to get out of personal costs ordered by North Gauteng Superior Court
slapped him for his failed review of the capture status report of former public protector Thuli Madonsela, it could end up failing if the economic freedom fighters (EFFs) have their way.
Zuma has now taken his fight to the Constitutional Court, where he has launched another request for permission to appeal.
The Superior Court rejected it in 2018, as did the Supreme Court of Appeals (SCA) last year.
Zuma says they were wrong and that he was “acting like chairman” when he decided to bring the report up for review. But the EFF says his “desperate” case should be thrown out and that the former president should be punished for abusing the judicial process, with another order for costs.
“This request is another attempt to abuse the judicial process to escape responsibility. Only this court can put an end to this abuse, ”the party said, through its lawyers, in documents filed in response to the Constitutional Court’s demand.
The Superior Court ordered Zuma to dig into his own pockets to cover the costs of the case, after discovering that he had
“There is no justifiable basis for launching the request for review in the circumstances.”
“In doing so, he was reckless and unreasonable,” he concluded.
But the former president in his papers before the Constitutional Court maintained that his review of the report involved what he considered “an important constitutional issue that needed certainty” – whether Madonsela was acting within the scope of his powers when he recommended to the President of the Supreme Court – Unlike the president, select a judge to chair a commission of inquiry.
“As president, I was concerned about establishing a commission of inquiry in a way that is not consistent with the constitution and applicable law,” he said.
He dismissed the Superior Court’s findings that the request was, according to him, an attempt to “block the corruption investigations that implicated me” and dismissed them as unfounded.
The EFF, however, said the High Court was right.
“[He], as president, he pursued personal ends despite his best efforts to attempt to bring his initial review request within the authority of the office he previously held, ”said Angelike Charalambous of Ian Levitt Attorneys.
in an affidavit deposited on behalf of the party.
Charalambous urged the Constitutional Court to dismiss the case and follow the High Court’s lead and issue another cost order against Zuma.
“[He] He is only concerned about the financial consequences that will befall him personally as a result of the [High] Court order. While this Court may have some sympathy for [him], that sympathy alone is not sufficient for you to be granted permission to appeal. That sympathy shouldn’t immunize him now from a punitive cost order on the attorney-client scale, ”he said.
“This is another iteration of the same doomed legal strategy that has already been rejected with the contempt it deserves.”
The Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (Casac) also opposes the request and, like the EFF, wants it to be dismissed along with the costs.
For more news your way, download The Citizen app to iOS and Android.
[ad_2]
