President-elect Jacob Zuma has ignored acting prosecuting head Mokotedi
Mpshe's request to respond to a court bid that would
expose all the evidence that led to his
release.
Zuma on Wednesday failed to reveal whether he would allow the release of his
confidential representations to the National Prosecuting Authority - and the
tape recordings that ultimately persuaded Mpshe to withdraw all charges against
him - as part of the Democratic Alliance's legal challenge to Mpshe's decision.
Last week, on the day that the NPA was scheduled to hand over all the
information used to make his decision on Zuma, Mpshe sent a letter to Zuma,
asking him to indicate whether he would permit the release of his
representations and tapes.
The date by which Zuma's lawyers were asked to do so was on Wednesday.
Officials at the State Attorney's Office on Wednesday told The Star that Zuma's
lawyers had not responded to the NPA's request and said they were unable to say
when they would do so.
"Our hands are tied we can't do anything until we
hear from Mr Zuma's lawyers *1," a state attorney involved in the matter
said.
As a result, all information about the Zuma-charges decision -
including prosecutors' memos and statements about
why the case against Zuma was solid and should stand - will not be
released before he moves into the Union Buildings.
In a letter addressed to the DA and Zuma, lawyers for the NPA last week
explained why they can't breach the confidentiality undertaking made to Zuma,
through his legal representatives: "Such a breach could potentially attract
liability for the NPA and (Mpshe) towards Mr Zuma and any other persons
mentioned and/or affected by the representations."
Meanwhile, uncertainty still surrounds a pending police probe into criminal
charges laid against Zuma's Durban-based lawyer, Michael Hulley, for possession
of the recordings and the circumstances in which the interceptions took place,
and how the State had passed it on to a private law firm.
Acting National Police Commissioner Tim Williams's office said on Wednesday that
the case had not yet been "registered" for investigation.
It follows a sworn statement made by DA MP Dianne Kohler-Barnard that Hulley was
allegedly in possession of "illegal, stolen recordings of intercepted telephone
conversations".
This article was originally published on page 1 of
The Star
on April 30, 2009