African National Congress President Jacob Zuma's recent settlement with the
South African Revenue Service (Sars) does not necessarily clear him "after
years of delinquency", the National Prosecuting
Authority said in papers on Friday.
The NPA's answering affidavit was lodged with the Pietermaritzburg High Court in
response to Zuma's application to have its decision to prosecute him declared
unconstitutional.
In the answering affidavit, senior investigator at the Directorate of Special
Operations (DSO), Johan du Plooy wrote: "I observe that the 'regularisation' of
his tax affairs after years of delinquency does not exculpate him any more than
a thief who repays the stolen money, or a shop-lifter who attempts to replace
the stolen goods on the shelf after he is caught."
Du Plooy pointed out that Zuma had settled with Sars "after
his indictment on the present charges".
Zuma claimed his settlement with Sars was "reached without any admission of
criminal conduct on my part and on the basis that it disposes of and resolves
all liability in respect of the said tax issues - both criminal and civil
liability".
Zuma said that the NPA should have been aware of his discussions with Sars
representatives since it had been "prying" into his financial affairs "and
indeed resorted to spying on me using intelligence
gathering methods not authorised by any competent body".
Du Plooy rejected the spying allegations, saying that "we were unaware of any
impending settlement of his outstanding taxes. This appears to have been a
recent development".
He said that the NPA had not received a copy of an agreement or proof of
payment.
Referring to the decision to try Zuma, Du Plooy said: "I submit that the most
pressing interest involved is to have the guilt or innocence of a person who
aspires to the highest office of the land definitively determined in a court of
law. The granting of this application would only serve to delay this end."
Zuma's application is expected to be heard in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on
August 4 and 5.
Zuma contends that the decision to prosecute him, announced shortly after the
ANC's national conference in Polokwane in December 2007, constituted a review
and reversal of a 2003 decision not to do so.
He said he had not been given the opportunity to make representations as to
whether the 2003 decision should be reviewed.
"This is a clear and, I submit, conscious and deliberate negation of the
constitutional requisites of calling for representations, considering these if
provided and then making an informed decision whether to reverse the earlier
decision and institute a prosecution or not."
Du Plooy said Zuma was not "entitled to make
representations before being charged. The prosecution
imperative remains, namely to prosecute without fear,
favour or prejudice *1," he said.
Zuma faces 16 charges in total - one count of racketeering, two counts of
corruption, one count of money laundering and 12 counts of fraud.
The two South African subsidiaries of Thales International (formerly Thomson-CFS
(sic CSF)) - Thint Holding (Southern Africa) Pty
Ltd and Thint (Pty) Ltd - are co-accused and each face a charge of racketeering
and two counts of corruption.
On June 30 the Mauritius Supreme Court rejected Zuma's application to be
involved in a case about documents that could be used as evidence against him by
the NPA.