SA fails again: Jacob Zuma Avoids Prosecution. I’m confused. How can only 1 half of a corrupt relationship be tried in court for fraud and corruption? How can the other half avoid going to court at all? Why is it so difficult for African countries to let the Law run its course?
Schabir Shaik was found guilty of fraud and corruption based on a relationship with Jacob Zuma about which the judge said there was overwhelming evidence it was corrupt. So a court of law proved that Schabir Shaik is a criminal fraudster and was guilty of corruption stemming from a corrupt relationship with Jacob Zuma. A relationship. Implying at least 2 people.
After 8 years, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) finally decide they will not charge Jacob Zuma in court, because his lawyers apparently proved the charges against him were politically motivated.
So lets get this straight. They were not in court, and they didn’t prove that Jacob Zuma was innocent. No, instead his lawyers had lengthy, closed-door discussions with the NPA and convinced them that the charges against Jacob Zuma were politically motivated.
Scabir Shaik was tried, found guilty, and went to jail like the common criminal he is – politics, I think we can agree, wasn’t a real consideration in his case – yet, the other half of that corrupt relationship, Jacob Zuma, can claim the same charges don’t apply to him because those same charges are politically motivated?
Jacob Zuma is basically sticking out his fat middle finger to Scabir Shaik saying ‘sorry mate, you do the crime, you do the time – but I do the crime, I start to whine and I avoid the time.’
Jacob Zuma’s lawyers said that for 8 long years he was tried in the public court of opinion. Boo fucking hoo. I can honestly say I’ve never heard of a man fighting tooth-n-nail not to go to court for 8 years because he’s innocent – usually the fighting goes on inside the court, because there’s stuff like evidence to back up your claims. If you’re innocent you go prove it in court – if you’re not, you avoid going to court and you think people won’t notice? People won’t talk, discuss and wonder why you’re so adamant not to go to court?
Behind those closed doors it was apparently also said that prosecuting Jacob Zuma was not in the best interest of the country.
Jacob Zuma, as the president of the ANC, will more than likely become South Africa’s next president after the April 22 elections. So, although South African presidents do not enjoy immunity from prosecution, it was apparently decided that having a president with legal proceeding against him won’t do anything for South Africa’s international street cred. Damn Skippy it won’t!
But the right thing to do here is not let him be president in the first place. Is having a president who somehow wriggled his way out of corruption charges better than having a president actually in the process of fighting corruption charges? Would you invest your trust in a man who side-stepped being tried for corruption, or would you invest your trust with a man who was tried, but cleared of any wrong doing… assuming the outcome was that he is innocent of course.
I’m pissed off this whole situation. And I’m angry that people still believe what the ANC tell them and will vote for them anyway. Nkosi Sikela Africa.
First Addition:
So the plot thickens. It appears that what they were doing behind those closed doors was not explain why the Jacob Zuma case should be dropped, but decide what to write in the press release instead. This piece of work took some crafting, I can tell you that.
The First
There are two controversies, the one stemming for the other. Some state apparatus recorded conversations between a menagerie of exes: ex-President Mbeki, ex-Scorpions Head McCarthy and ex-NPA Head Bulelani Ngcuka. Conveniently Jacob Zuma and team had copies (or originals perhaps?) of these conversations, which supposedly contains the compelling evidence, not that the charges against him were politically motivated (in fact, from what I’ve read, the conversations affirm that positive evidence supported the charges), but that the timing of laying the charges were manipulated.
The Second
The burning questions of who made those recordings and how did Jacob Zuma get his showered-after-AIDS-sex paws on them aside, the manipulated timing of the charges is why the NPA is dropping this whole hot potato.
As far as I, Joe Soap, John Everyman, Joe the Plumber, can see they a) didn’t change the fact that Jacob Zuma was charged for corruption, b) didn’t address whether or not he is guilty, c) didn’t illustrate that the charges were politically motivated, and d) didn’t finally lay this thing to rest.
Why d)? Because, aparently there’s all sorts of ways that Zuma could potentially still have his day in court. But first they’re putting on a witch-hunt to prosecute those who apparently messed with Zuma’s charges. But that’s in the hands of the NPA – oh dear.