DA leader Helen Zille. Picture: Reuters

Opposition party says it will lodge a court application against the NPA for contempt of court after the prosecuting authority failed to provide it with documents relating to the decision to drop fraud and corruption charges against President Jacob Zuma

If there were "rational" reasons to withdraw corruption charges against President Jacob Zuma , the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) should not hesitate to put those reasons on the table, Democratic Alliance (DA) leader Helen Zille said yesterday.

The DA said it would lodge a court application against the NPA for contempt of court after the prosecuting authority failed to provide the opposition party with documents relating to the decision to drop fraud and corruption charges against Mr Zuma in 2009, shortly before he was elected.

A Supreme Court of Appeal judgment earlier this year ordered the prosecuting authority to provide the DA with the documents relating to the decision to drop the charges against Mr Zuma.

The NPA decided not to appeal against the judgment. However, four months after the judgment was handed down, the NPA has still not complied with it.

The decision by the DA came on the same day that a challenge by prosecutor Glynnis Breytenbach against her suspension from the NPA failed. Johannesburg Labour Court Judge Hamilton Cele dismissed the application, and said no costs were ordered. Ms Breytenbach had claimed she was sidelined in order to protect former crime intelligence head Richard Mdluli.

Speaking during a press briefing to announce the DA’s decision to approach the Gauteng North High Court to compel the NPA to comply with the order of the appeal court, Ms Zille said it was unprecedented for the NPA to be in contempt of court.

"It is untenable that an institution of state, constitutionally mandated to uphold the law without fear or favour, has blatantly defied an order of the Supreme Court of Appeal. This is unacceptable, unconstitutional and illegal," Ms Zille said.

The fact that the NPA had been determined to delay executing a court order, even to the point of being in contempt of court, raised several questions, she said.

"We believe it is a tip of the iceberg and if we get the reduced record, which is what the court has ordered, more and more things will come ... an entire pack of cards will come tumbling down," Ms Zille said. "By refusing to give us the record, it shows that there is either no record or the record compromises the NPA."

NPA spokesman Mthunzi Mhaga said yesterday the prosecuting authority was still committed to providing the DA with the reduced record as per the appeal court ruling and would provide it soon.

"The process is taking longer than we anticipated, hence the delay in supplying them with the relevant information," he said.

"The process includes transcribing of the records, verification and submitting to the president’s legal team due to the representations being subject to confidentiality rule."

Mr Mhaga said the NPA would deal with any further court action the DA would institute.

Prof Shadrack Gutto, a constitutional law expert, said yesterday the delay by the NPA to comply with the appeal court ruling would lead to increased suspicion that the decision to drop charges against Mr Zuma was politically motivated.

The African National Congress earlier this year said it was disappointed with the Supreme Court of Appeal’s ruling, with spokesman Jackson Mthembu saying: "It is clear that democracy can be undermined by simply approaching courts to reverse any decision arrived at by a qualified organ of state."