So serious has the looming prosecution of Deputy President Jacob Zuma and his determined campaign to stay in office become, it has triggered a security threat analysis by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).

The analysis of the economic, political and national security implications of an NPA decision to charge Zuma with conspiracy to corruption is being conducted by NPA officials, and is to be considered by the NPA’s executive committee at its weekly meeting, starting tomorrow.

The meeting looks set to mark the beginning of the end of Zuma’s career in the cabinet as its agenda suggests that the NPA has already decided to charge Zuma and is weighing the implications of such a move.

The executive committee ­ chaired by NPA boss Vusi Pikoli ­ includes Scorpions chief Leonard McCarthy, Willie Hofmeyr, head of the Asset Forfeiture Unit, prosecuting services’ leader Jan Henning, head of special services Silas Ramaite, head of Pikoli’s office Marion Sparg and a cluster of legal advisers.

Pikoli refused to comment on tomorrow’s meeting. “I will not be pressured by anyone to make an announcement. I’ll speak when I’m ready,” he said yesterday.

However, NPA sources said Pikoli had told senior staff he was “prepared” to charge Zuma, despite the expected political fallout. Zuma is likely to face charges of conspiracy to commit corruption and accepting a bribe negotiated by his financial adviser Schabir Shaik, convicted two weeks ago of corruption and fraud. A senior NPA source said at the weekend: “The (NPA) has no choice but to charge him this time.”

The national security threat analysis comes amid growing signs that the schisms threatening the ruling African National Congress (ANC) are spilling onto the country’s security services.

“The divisions you see in the ANC you also find in the intelligence agencies,” a spy close to the ANC said yesterday.

Analysts said the crisis sparked by the Zuma saga had pitted the NPA against the top brass of the South African Police Service (SAPS) and the National Intelligence Agency (NIA).

The NPA declined to charge Zuma three years ago *1, in a decision many commentators said was politically motivated. Former NPA head Bulelani Ngcuka said then there was “prima facie” evidence of corruption against Zuma, but not a “winnable” case.

NPA insiders said many in the agency felt at the time Ngcuka’s statement was a political move to dent Zuma’s bid to succeed President Thabo Mbeki.

Jakkie Cilliers, head of the Institute for Security Studies, said yesterday a threat analysis was necessary given the high profile of the people involved.

However, the implications of charging Zuma were political rather than security related. “Given the high-profile nature of the case, I think it’s required.

“But I do not believe there are significant security concerns to sway the president’s decision either way,” he said.

Mbeki has been in consultation with Pikoli since the two visited Chile last week. It is expected Pikoli’s decision will have to get the presidential go-ahead.

Mbeki has to weigh the political fallout of having his deputy charged. Externally, Mbeki is under pressure from Group of Eight countries to be seen to be tough against corruption. Internally, he faces an unexpected rebellion from various ANC structures against his leadership style.

Western Cape was the latest to revolt, with Mbeki man Ebrahim Rasool booted out of his post as party boss at the weekend.

Zuma told SABC last night he was prepared to stand down and become an ordinary ANC member, but that his decision would not be dictated by the media.

With acknowledgements to Karima Brown, Vukani Mde, Jacob Dlamini and Business Day.

*1  Actually 23 August 2003, not quite two years ago.

Lessons in History

he affidavits by the NPA in support of court applications for warrants for search and seizure of the Thomson-CSF and Nkobi Group premises were signed on or about 24 August 2001.

At about the same time, a simultaneous request by the Investigating Team for a court application for a warrant for search and seizure of Jacob Zuma's offices and residence(s) was refused by the National Director of Public Prosecutions, Bulelani Ngcuka.

Opinion

No wonder that successful prosecution was not assured, even in the light of a prima facie case.