Publication: Business Day Issued: Date: 2008-09-05 Reporter: Karima Brown Reporter: Amy Musgrave

Cosatu Sets Battle Plan to Shield Zuma 

 

Publication 

Business Day
Date 2008-09-05
Reporter Karima Brown, Amy Musgrave
Web Link www.bday.co.za

 

The Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) has unveiled a battle plan to have African National Congress (ANC) president Jacob Zuma's fraud charges dropped.

This would include becoming a friend of the court in Zuma's bid to launch a stay of prosecution, a possible national strike and "engaging" business, the judiciary and churches on its campaign.

Cosatu warned yesterday that its decision to join Zuma in court could lead to the "exposure of the truth behind the arms deal", which it said could implicate a number of others.*1

While Zuma has to answer to 16 charges of corruption, there have been newspaper reports linking President Thabo Mbeki to SA's multibillion-rand arms deal *2.

Cosatu's plan follows mounting calls for the corruption charges against Zuma to be dropped and for a "political solution" to be found *3.

This has support from sections of the business community, the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the ANC *4.

Cosatu general secretary Zwelinzima Vavi stressed that the federation's position did not amount to undermining the rule of law, but that it "genuinely" feared the consequences of Zuma being found guilty. "I don't want this to be taken out of context, but the CEC (central executive committee) is really worried about the mood of workers and we fear what the reaction will be *5.

"The belief among workers and South Africans that the ANC president is a target of machinations runs very deep *6," he said.

"We are talking to business privately. There is overwhelming sentiment that we cannot afford this *7," Vavi said.

Cosatu outlined 14 reasons why it believed Zuma would not get a fair trial, one being that his prosecution was selective *8.

Allegations that SACP boss Blade Nzimande had been "set up" by businessman Charles Modise, who claimed he gave Nzimande a R500000 donation, were highlighted as the latest example of how state institutions have been manipulated in the Zuma affair.

The executive committee also discussed a number of options to end the seven-year legal impasse between Zuma and the National Prosecuting Authority, including the possibility of passing legislation that would prevent a sitting president from being prosecuted.

It is understood that Vavi will discuss the matter with Archbishop Desmond Tutu and retired chief justice Arthur Chaskalson.

With acknowledgements to Karima Brown, Amy Musgrave and Business Day.


*1       Now this is very good.


*2      There is a lot more than newspaper reports linking President Thabo Mbeki to SA's multibillion-rand arms deal.

There is a host of documentary evidence linking President Thabo Mbeki to SA's multibillion-rand arms deal.

This evidence was accepted as admissible by the defence in the Schabir Shaik trial. There is absolutely no reason to question its veracity.

It is therefore prima facie evidence.

It also makes out a case for Mbeki to answer.

Other and similar documentary evidence also makes out a case for Zuma to answer.

Therefore the simple legal logic is that both Zuma and Mbeki should be in court answering charges of unlawfulness regarding their conduct in the Arms Deal.

The NPA should do its job and investigate Mbeki's conduct in the Arms Deal.

Unless there is a compelling case not to charge Mbeki, then it should do so.

So the only valid legitimate "deal" is to both Zuma and Mbeki.


*3      There are absolutely no legal grounds for corruption charges against Zuma to be dropped and for a "political solution" to be found.


*4      This is a very small section of South African Society.

And exactly who in the Business Community seeks an unlawful "solution"?

But even if there is just one person in the country who is bona fide and wants the charges to be maintained on the basis of a prima facie case, then the rule of law says that the case continues.


*5      Here is a simple instance of the whole illogic of the politically allied.

They wind up the workers to become agitated and then become concerned about the workers' agitation.

In simple logic, it does not follow, it is non sequitur, it is illogical.

Go home, leave the law to do its work, leave the Accused to have their days in court, leave the witnesses to give their evidence, leave the advocates to test the evidence, leave the judge and his assessors to weigh the evidence, let the judge give his reasoned judgment, leave the losing side to rake the matter on appeal, leave the Accused go to jail if guilty.


*6      The belief among South Africans other than the workers is that the workers themselves are targets of machinations that run very deep and which are designed to protect the guilty ANC President because he cannot protect himself in court.

The ANC President cannot protect himself in court because he does not have a plausible or credible defence.

This has already been proven when he lied to Parliament about meeting Alain Thetard of Thomson-CSF and he was evasive in his responses to formal questions put to him by the NPA.


*7      What exactly is the level of this "overwhelming" sentiment that we cannot afford this? How is it measured?

But "overwhelming" sentiment is insufficient. There would have to be 100% consensus among all South African citizens, at least those with a valid ID number and over the age of 18 years.


*8      Zuma's prosecution is selective.

But there is a simple principle of logic that two wrongs don't make a right.

The NPA should remove this as one of Cosatu's 124 reasons.

Investigate Thabo Mbeki and Chippy Shaik, at the least.

Fana Hlongwane and some others are already being investigated.

NPA - do it.