Setback for Zuma [The Witness, 2006-09-06]

Publication	The Witness
Date	2006-09-06
Reporter	Jan-Jan Joubert
Web Link	www.witness.co.za

Flanked by bodyguards, Jacob Zuma enters the Pietermaritzburg High Court yesterday for the continuation of his corruption case.

In an enormous setback for Jacob Zuma and his legal team, Judge Herbert Msimang said in the Pietermaritzburg High Court yesterday afternoon that he did not think Zuma’s corruption trial was unfair.

This came after a day in which Msimang castigated the state’s legal team in the person of Advocate Wim Trengove, SC, about their application to have the trial postponed until next year.

After Trengove had laboured for nearly four hours to convince Msimang about the state’s case, Advocate Kemp J. Kemp, SC, appearing for Zuma, looked at ease when he began to argue against a postponement.

Kemp repeatedly said that he has not had a chance to prepare properly so that his client could get a fair trial. He emphasised repeatedly that constitutional issues are at stake in this case, without making it clear if he thought Zuma may ultimately turn to the Constitutional Court.

He said 15 months have passed since his client was first charged and he, Kemp, still does not know exactly what he is supposed to be defending him against. The state, he said, chose first to charge Zuma and then to carry out raids on the homes and offices of Zuma and several of his confidantes. The defence warned the state a long time ago that such an approach was very risky, and now the state is refusing to face the consequent challenges.

He said the state will keep changing the indictment, even though the trial has already started. He argued that the indictment should have been finalised by the time the case was listed on the high court roll.

But at 3.30 pm yesterday afternoon, after Kemp had said for the umpteenth time that the state had not carried out its constitutional obligation by at least providing Zuma with a full indictment, Msimang revealed his hand.

Msimang shocked the former deputy president and his legal representatives from the bench when he told Kemp that he, Kemp, could not say that the trial was therefore unfair. “I do not think this is an unfair trial.”

Msimang also told Kemp that the state has not said it will “never” provide the defence team with an indictment it will do so later.

This is bad news for Zuma and his co-accused, Thint, who had hoped they could persuade Msimang to withdraw the corruption charges against them permanently.

Msimang already indicated earlier in the day that he did not rate this application highly when he ruled that the state’s application for postponement of the case should be heard first and separately.

He said that after he had ruled on the matter the defence might possibly think they aren’t strong enough to proceed with the other application (for an unfair trial) *1.

Regarding the postponement application, Msimang could postpone the case (as the state is requesting), strike it from the main roll, or order the state to commence with the case. The latter is impossible for both the state and the defence.

Trengove said yesterday the state will be ready to start on October 15 when it hands over the final indictment to the defence.

However, Kemp said he did not attach much value to this undertaking by the state, and that it is wrong, in any case, that the defence should continually be waiting for the state to be ready, given the fact that the state has already acted incorrectly, both procedurally and constitutionally, regarding the indictment.

But the defence will need months to study the KPMG report of 500 pages handed to the legal teams yesterday. In the Schabir Shaik trial it took Shaik’s legal team three months to prepare for that.

If the case is struck from the roll, the state will charge Zuma and Thint again.

After Msimang had revealed his hand, Kemp expressed himself in favour of this option. When Msimang asked how he (Msimang) could “punish” the state for delaying the case, Kemp replied, “Tell them to get their house in order. Strike the case from the roll and tell them to come back when they’ve completed everything *2.”

Kemp will present further argument this morning, after which advocate Nirmal Singh, SC, will oppose the application for postponement on behalf of Thint.