By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
Former president Jacob Zuma has filed his answering affidavit opposing President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent application after he has missed the deadline.
Zuma says there is no urgency in the matter and that “any urgency that may exist is self-created”.
Zuma instituted a private prosecution against Ramaphosa on the eve of the African National Congress (ANC) national elective conference, accusing the president of being an “accessory after the fact” in a criminal offence alleged against Advocate William Downer, who is accused of improperly sharing information in terms of the NPA Act.
In his application, Ramaphosa argued that in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Act, a private prosecution can only be instituted after the individual prosecuting has obtained a certificate of non-prosecution.
“Zuma has not provided such a certificate with charges in the name of President Ramaphosa and the summon served to the President is hopelessly sub-standard and demonstrate absolute disregard of the law,” said Ramaphosa, adding that the private prosecution against him was “unlawful” and “unconstitutional”.
Ramaphosa argues that the current summons is “procedurally irrational” and the second summons is invalid as long as the first remains in place. “This is unlawful and must result in both summonses being declared invalid and set aside,” he argues.
He also points out that there is no proof of a security deposit given to the registrar by Zuma when the summonses were issued and this too renders them unlawful.
Finally, Ramaphosa argues that private prosecution is being pursued due to ulterior motives by Zuma and is therefore in breach of the president’s constitutional rights.
In his answering affidavit opposing Ramaphosa’s urgent application, Zuma said the president’s affidavit was “defective, extremely abusive, frivolous and vexatious”.
“It will be amply demonstrated that the application is neither urgent nor deserving to this Court’s attention. It represents an extreme case of the egregious abuse of this Court’s process and is designed to shield the Applicant from accountability for his alleged criminal conduct, which includes a failure to act when he had a legal duty to do so. It is by now trite that crimes are committed either by commission or by omission,” said Zuma in his affidavit.
He said the “real essence” of Ramaphosa’s application was to seek “unprecedented, special and preferential treatment” as a criminally charged and accused person.
The matter is expected to be heard in the High Court in Johannesburg on 10 January.