[ad_1]
A quick Google search of Duduzane Zuma’s name is all it takes to end his father’s latest claim that his sons have not been implicated in the State Capture Investigation Commission. One of the first successes is a video of Duduzane testifying before the commission last October, after former Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas implicated him.
In August 2018, Jonas told the commission that Duduzane had brought him to the Guptas’ home in Saxonwold, where he was offered the post of minister and 600 million rand in exchange for his influence.
Duduzane vehemently denied the allegations, but his mere appearance in the investigation contradicts the accused statement made by his father, former President Jacob Zuma, on Friday.
Zuma lashed out at the commission’s investigators following a recent report that they had issued subpoenas for bank statements for “at least 20 accounts linked to the Zuma family,” including a television production company owned by Zuma’s daughter, Gugulethu Zuma-Ncube. .
In addition to stating that his children, so far, “have not received any notification indicating that they are implicated in any way by the witnesses selected by the commission,” Zuma said in his three-and-a-half page response. The commission’s terms of reference “make it clear that I, and not my children, am the focus of the commission’s investigation.”
This is not the case either. The “Report on the Status of Capture” of former public protector Thuli Madonsela, in whose support the commission was established, mentioned Duduzane by name no less than 14 times.
And the terms of reference, the commission has the task of investigating “in particular, if any member of the National Executive [including the president]A public official, an official of any State body influenced the awarding of tenders for their own benefit, their families or the entities in which they had a personal interest ”.
At one point in his statement, Zuma called the investigations in question “illegal.” But expert legal attorney Paul Hoffman described this as “ridiculous.”
Zuma in his statement denounced that if his children are being investigated, “they must be notified so that they can exercise their rights like anyone else involved.”
But, as Hoffman explained yesterday, notifying someone that they were being investigated in advance would be a counterproductive strategy because it would provide them with the opportunity to hide any potential evidence.
Hoffman also noted that part of the commission’s mandate was to recover looted state funds.
“If the children are innocent, they have nothing to fear because the documentary evidence from the subpoenaed banks will reveal nothing,” Hoffman said. “But if you reveal that they are the recipients of the loot, then they have committed a crime and are responsible for returning the proceeds of that crime.”
Hoffman described Zuma’s latest attack on the commission, which comes less than a month after he announced that he would not appear until a request was heard for the commission’s chairman, Supreme Court Vice President Raymond Zondo, to recuse himself. , was nothing more than “the fallen man desperate turns”.
Political analyst Dr. Ralph Mathekga said yesterday that the former president would have to be “dragged by the ears to the commission.” “He doesn’t think he has anything to answer for,” Mathekga said. – [email protected]
For more news your way, download The Citizen app to iOS Y Android.
[ad_2]
