OPINION

A serious blow to the rule of law - F.W. de Klerk

Former president says civil society should consider a legal challenge to NPA decision to drop charges

FW DE KLERK'S REACTION TO THE DECISION OF THE
NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY TO DROP CHARGES
AGAINST MR JACOB ZUMA

The decision to drop charges against Mr Jacob Zuma will be widely regarded in South Africa and overseas as the most serious blow to the rule of law since the dawn of our new constitutional democracy.  Civil society should consider mounting legal challenges to the decision and should call, once again, for the appointment of a judicial commission of enquiry into the arms deal - which lies at the root of so many of the current threats to our constitutional system.

Adv Mpshe's decision cannot be seen in isolation.  It follows the decision to abolish the NPA's Directorate of Special Operations (the Scorpions) last year; President Motlanthe's questionable dismissal of the previous National Director of Public Prosecutions, Adv Vusi Pikoli; and the transparently engineered early release from prison of Mr Schabir Shaik because of some supposed terminal medical condition.  The cumulative effect of these developments has been to raise serious questions regarding the NPA's present and future independence and whether all South Africans are still treated equally before the law.

  • In the opinion of the F W de Klerk Foundation's Centre for Constitutional Rights, Adv Mpshe erred in his decision to drop charges against Mr Zuma for the following reasons;
  • No questions have been raised regarding the soundness of the NPA's case against Mr Zuma. The NPA has stated on affidavit that it has "a firm basis for the institution of a prosecution";
  • the timing and motives of the decision of the former Director of the DSO to charge  Mr Zuma would not affect Mr Zuma's right to a fair trial; and
  • the Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled that "A prosecution is not wrongful merely because it is brought for an improper purpose. It will only be wrongful if, in addition, reasonable and probable grounds for prosecuting are absent".

Statement issued by the F.W. de Klerk Foundations, April 6 2009

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter