Publication: Mail and Guardian Issued: Date: 2006-08-31 Reporter: Sapa Reporter:

State : Dropping Charges Not In Public Interest

 

Publication 

Mail and Guardian
Date

2006-08-31

Reporter

 Sapa

Web Link

www.mg.co.za

 

Justifying its position, the state pointed out that Zuma had held the second-highest public office in the land and aspires to the highest office.

"The case is accordingly one of the highest public interest *1."

Referring to both Zuma and his co-accused -- the two Thint (formerly Thomson-CSF) companies -- which are subsidiaries of the French arms manufacturer Thales, the state said: "Striking the matter from the roll will not ameliorate the social prejudice of which the accused complain.

"They will continue to live under the cloud of suspicion that is described in their affidavits."

Described as "the battle plan", heads of argument are prepared by legal teams to set out their arguments in a clear and convincing way. Heads of argument generally indicate the name and number of the case, a description of the parties, the background facts, the legal questions that arise, the applicable law and a conclusion.

Zuma's defence team and that of his co-accused filed their heads of argument on Monday.

Zuma is expected to appear in court on next Tuesday when he and Thint seek a permanent stay of prosecution. The state is seeking to have the case postponed until early next year.

With acknowledgements to Sapa and Mail and Guardian.


*1       Dropping the charges is only in the interest of the Accused. Because this is probably the only way they will escape very severe punishment.

But if the Court orders The State to drop the charges, will the State furnish nulle prosequi certificates to those who request them.