The Constitutional Court ruling on the validity of the search and seizure warrants obtained by the Scorpions in August 2005 to raid properties of African National Congress president Jacob Zuma and his lawyers will reinforce the widely held belief that our justice system is incapable of protecting the basic rights guaranteed in the c onstitution.

The ruling has far-reaching implications in which the privilege of client-lawyer confidentiality and the right to legal representation will mean nothing to those in power in their quest to achieve a particular agenda.

It means that law enforcement agencies may be used as a private army to mislead or coerce courts to issue vague and open-ended warrants bordering on selective and subjective justice in order to settle political scores.

The court failed to appreciate the fact that the state used the Scorpions to pursue charges of corruption against Zuma emanating from the arms deal, yet the primary beneficiaries of the deal were never charged or convicted.

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) never asked President Thabo Mbeki to answer questions under oath on allegations that he met members of a Germany company which had not even made the short list but got to the front of the queue for some of the contracts.

There was prima facie evidence that Mbeki met members of the same company before it got a tender. Even then, South African ambassador to France Barbara Masekela affirmed before suspended NPA head Vusi Pikoli that she has a recollection of arranging such a meeting as part of her diplomatic duty.

Pikoli must break the silence and expose these evil conspirators in the interest of justice.

Morgan Phaahla
Ekurhuleni

With acknowledgements to Morgan Phaahla and Business Day.