|
Zuma Judgment : Mbeki's Full Statement |
| Publication |
Cape Argus |
| Date | 2009-01-13 |
|
Web Link |
Following careful consideration of Monday's Judgement of the Supreme Court
of Appeal (SCA) in the matter between the National Director of Public
Prosecutions and African National Congress President, Mr Jacob Zuma, former
President Thabo Mbeki wishes to make the following observations:
1. I welcome and accept the determinations made by the SCA that Judge Nicholson
had no facts before him to suggest that I and the Cabinet interfered with the
National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in its consideration of matters relating to
Mr Jacob Zuma.
2. In my Address to the Nation on September 21, 2008, I said: "I would like to
restate the position of Cabinet on the inferences made by the Honourable Judge
Chris Nicholson that the President and Cabinet have interfered in the work of
the National Prosecuting Authority. Again I would like to state this
categorically that we have never done this...In this context it is most
unfortunate that gratuitous suggestions have been made seeking to impugn the
integrity of those of us who have been privileged to serve in our country's
National Executive."
3. I agree with the SCA where it says Judge Nicholson made "gratuitous findings
against persons who were not called upon to defend themselves...(failed) to
distinguish between allegation, fact and suspicion, and ...(transgressed) the
proper boundaries between judicial, executive and legislative functions."
4. Accordingly, I also agree with the SCA where it says, "Most of the
allegations (of political interference) were not only irrelevant but they were
gratuitous and based on suspicion and not on fact."
5. I also agree with the SCA where it says, "Once again, the 'strategy'
involving Dr Maduna, Mr Mbeki and all the other members of cabinet as well as
the causal connection between the Ngcuka decision and Mr Mbeki and the cabinet
as found by the trial judge were not based on any evidence or allegation. They
were instead part of the judge's own conspiracy theory and not one advanced by
Mr Zuma."
6. Like the SCA, we had found the manner by which Judge Nicholson made negative
findings against the President and the Cabinet "incomprehensible".
7. We intervened in the NPA appeal to the SCA because we wanted to correct the
unfair and unwarranted inferences made by Judge Nicholson against us, and as the
SCA said, we "had ample reason to be upset by the reasons in the judgement which
cast aspersions on (us) without regard to (our) basic rights to be treated
fairly." The SCA ruling has vindicated us.
8. It seems to me that the unacceptable practice of propagation of deliberate
falsehoods to attain various objectives is becoming entrenched in our country. I
am pleased that the SCA has provided firm leadership in this regard by insisting
that nobody's integrity should be impugned on the basis of untested allegations.
9. All of us as leaders and citizens have the responsibility critically to
reflect on this practice in order to avoid the entrenchment of a culture which
may eventually corrupt our society.