|
Appeal Court Judgment 'Flawed' - Lawyers |
| Publication |
Cape Argus |
| Date | 2009-02-04 |
| Reporter | Ella Smook |
|
Web Link |
The Supreme Court of Appeal judgment which effectively reinstated corruption
charges against ANC president Jacob Zuma is
"deeply and fundamentally flawed" *1 and
not in line with the constitution *2, Zuma's lawyers have argued in
papers filed with the Constitutional Court.
The move came as Zuma was due to appear in the Pietermaritzburg High Court on
Wednesday to seek leave to appeal against the judgment by a full bench of the
Supreme Court, which overturned an earlier judgment by Judge Chris Nicholson in
the High Court.
The Nicholson judgment, which was severely criticised in Judge Louis Harms's
judgment in the Appeal Court, had scrapped charges against Zuma and had also
found that his assertions of a political motive behind his prosecution could not
be ruled out.
Hundreds *3 of Zuma supporters gathered
outside the Pietermaritzburg High Court today, some dancing, others carrying
umbrellas in a light drizzle.
In Tuesday's application to the Constitutional Court, Zuma attacked the Harms
judgment with the same bat it employed in its assessment of the Nicholson
judgment.
Zuma contends that the Harms judgment incorrectly slated the Nicholson judgment
for making findings on matters not before the court - especially on allegations
of political interference - but that the Harms judgment itself was at fault in
making findings on matters not before the appeal court.
Zuma contends that his allegations of political interference were not only
relevant to the case at hand, but highlighted his need to seek to make
representations to the NPA before a decision was made to prosecute. This request
was denied.
With acknowledgements to
Ella Smook and Cape Argus.