The commission of inquiry into state capture has adopted an "arm's length" approach in its contempt case against former president Jacob Zuma to remove any claim of bias by Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo.
This is a view shared by legal experts after Zondo yesterday opted to refer Zuma's defiance of the commission's summons back to the Constitutional Court which had ordered him to appear before the inquiry to answer questions.
Zuma was a no-show yesterday, prompting Zondo to announce that the commission's legal team would be approaching the apex court as Zuma’s “open defiance” could no longer be tolerated.
If it is allowed to prevail, there will be lawlessness and chaos... If the message that issent out is that people can ignore or disregard summons and orders of courts and that they can defy those with impunity, there will be very little that will be left of our democracy
“If it is allowed to prevail, there will be lawlessness and chaos... If the message that issent out is that people can ignore or disregard summons and orders of courts and that they can defy those with impunity, there will be very little that will be left of our democracy,” Zondo said.
In a 12-page media statement released last night, a defiant Zuma accused Zondo and the commission's evidence leader Paul Pretorius of trying to "influence public opinion" by pushing a narrative against him.
"In his long-prepared speech, Pretorius SC presented what Deputy Chief Justice Zondo literally called evidence against me. Realizing that they had forfeited the opportunity to present the evidence tome, they did what has become their hallmark at the commission in making submissions to each other and playing politics to influence public opinion," Zuma stated.
He said he was ready for any sentence that the Constitutional Court will impose against him.
Law expert, Dr Llewelyn Curlewis from the University of Pretoria, said Zondo had an option of leaving the matter in the hands of the National Prosecuting Authority for a criminal prosecution for contempt of court.
“By going back to the Constitutional Court, we are merely going to see a possible civil application for contempt of court which means Zuma can be incarcerated for 30 days if he doesn’t come and supply the court with decent reasons why he shouldn’t be incarcerated for contempt of court. So personally, I think that’s a waste of time and further legal expenses,” Curlewis said.
He said he believes that inquiry was applying "an arm's length approach” as Zuma had cited a review application against Zondo’s decision not to recuse himself as the reason for not complying with the summons.
“The rationale is that Zondo wants to leave it to the Concourt judges to sort it out… seeing that Zuma makes it a fact that there’s a review application for his (Zondo) recusal. Zuma is going to take that stance again should Zondo hold the contempt enquiry himself,” Curlewis said.
Zondo said Zuma had defied the commission by walking out on its proceedings on November 19 and also ignoring the Constitutional Court order compelling him to appear yesterday.
Zuma failed to comply with summons issued for him to appear before the commission from January18 to 22 prompting the commission secretary to lay criminal complaint against him.
Zondo said if Zuma was to be allowed to continue with his conduct, it would set a bad precedent.
Last month, the Constitutional Court ordered Zuma to appear before the commission after walking out of the inquiry’s proceedings in November.
But Zuma in his public statement indicated that he would not come before the commission stating he would rather face arrest.
Yesterday, however, Zuma's lawyers said he would not appear before the commission as he was challenging Zondo’s refusal to recuse himself. He also labelled the summons served by the commission’s legal team as irregular.
Zondo rejected this, saying Zuma was given ample time during the Constitutional Court application to address his concerns and he chose not to challenge the commission.
Criminal law expert Stephen Tuson said the commission could have simply reported Zuma to the police than going to the apex court.
“One option that Zondo could have used was to lay a criminal charge of contravention of the Commissions Act and then the police would then investigate and then summon Zuma or arrest him to face criminal charges in a magistrate’s court in contravention of the act,” Tuson said.
ANC NEC member Mondli Gungubele said Zuma's actions were not a good spectacle to watch but that he did not wish to see him go to jail. Gungubele said he hoped Zuma would change his mind.
“I wish a resolution can be found to encourage comrade Zuma to appear before the commission if there’s still time,” Gungubele said.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.