Johannesburg : ANC president Jacob Zuma has
missed his agreed deadline
to tell his prosecutors why they should withdraw the corruption case against
him.
And the ANC says the aspirant president is
still undecided over whether or not he will make
representations*1 to the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA)
about the corruption, fraud, money laundering and racketeering charges he faces.
"The decision has not been taken … but there are
definitely discussions taking place *2,"
ANC spokesperson Carl Niehaus said yesterday.
Niehaus said lawyers for Zuma and the NPA were yesterday locked in
"talks about talks" *3.
These related to the "conditions and timeline" for Zuma's representations -
which form the basis of his latest legal wrangle with the state.
NPA spokesperson Tlali Tlali yesterday confirmed that Zuma was scheduled to hand
over his representations. But, he said, the reasons Zuma had not done so were
"unknown".
"After the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling on January 12 (which declared that
Zuma's prosecution was valid), Mr Zuma's lawyers contacted us and said that they
wished to make representations.
"An agreement was reached that they would do so by January 26. We expected those
representations today (Monday).
"We received an indication (late on Monday afternoon) that they will not be
submitted today," Tlali said.
Zuma's attorney, Michael Hulley, could not be reached for comment on the reason
for the delay in the submission of Zuma's representations.
It remains unclear when, if at all, they will be submitted.
Meanwhile, next month looks set to be a busy time for Zuma's legal team.
Other than Zuma's appearance in the
Pietermaritzburg High Court on February 4, when the
progress of his trial is to be mapped out, Zuma's lawyers are
expected to return to the Mauritian Supreme Court
late next month or early March.
Zuma will then attempt to challenge Mauritian Supreme Court Judge Rehana
Mungly-Gulbul's ruling, which refused him the right to stop the NPA from
securing evidence against him.
While Zuma claimed he was the victim of a plot orchestrated by then-president
Thabo Mbeki and suspended NPA head Vusi Pikoli, the judge said Zuma had not
shown "good cause" why he should be allowed to intervene.
In her judgment, Mungly-Gulbul said Zuma would be allowed to attend the hearing
of the state's request for the originals of 13 Mauritian documents used to
convict his former financial adviser Schabir Shaik.
The 13 documents include the 2000 diary of ex-Thint chief executive Alain
Thetard, which detailed a meeting between him, Zuma and Shaik at which a R500
000-a-year bribe for Zuma was allegedly discussed.
With acknowledgements
to Karyn Maughan and Cape Times.
*1The problem is
that these representations will be (or should be) with prejudice.
So what he says will be taken down and used against him if his representations
fail.
And why they should succeed, nobody knows, including him.
Otherwise he'd be there faster than he could take a shower.
*2The NPA has agreed to take representations, but these are
not happening.'
So just what are the big knobs in the NPA think they're doing?
They must tell us - right now.
*3Zuma has no right to submit representations.
The NPA must play this on its own terms.
Give him a 48 hour extension and then close down this chapter of this rude
pantomime.