The High Court in Johannesburg has found that President Cyril Ramaphosa would suffer material harm should he appear in a criminal court in accordance with the summons issued by former President Jacob Zuma.
This after President Ramaphosa has been granted an interim interdict to halt former president Jacob Zuma’s private prosecution bid.
Last Thursday, the court heard arguments from the President’s lawyers that he could not be hauled before a criminal court on summons obtained through a flawed, unconstitutional process.
Advocate Ngwako Maenetje argued that the law provides the President with protection over what he says is an ‘unlawful prosecution’.
However, counsel for the former president, Advocate Dali Mpofu, argued that President Ramaphosa would not suffer any harm and that he would have the opportunity to defend his case in court.
Zuma launched private prosecution proceedings against Ramaphosa, accusing him of failing to act against prosecutor Billy Downer over the alleged unlawful disclosure of his medical records.
In the judgment handed down by the full bench, Deputy Judge President Roland Sutherland says Ramaphosa would suffer harm.
“Is there any material harm? It was argued that the harm of appearing in a criminal court on the 19th of January was not material, this contention misses the point. The harm lies not in the temporary inconvenience of physically attending a hearing if only for a formal postponement. The critical harm concerns a fundamentally, constitutionally guaranteed right to personal freedom. That value which is foundational to our constitutional order may never be treated lightly. Our history instructs us that it is a matter of pride that South Africans value and assert our freedom above all other considerations in the face of whatever adversity we chance to meet. Our law must guard that right and exercise unreservedly,” says Sutherland.
Ramaphosa welcomes interdict
Meanwhile, the president has welcomed the court’s decision to interdict the private prosecution bid.
In a statement, the office of The Presidency says: “The court affirmed all of the president’s key contentions, namely on jurisdiction of the court to hear the interdict application, the urgency of the matter against a court appearance date based on prima facie unlawful nolle prosequi. The court further found in the President’s favour on the violation of rights to personal freedom based on a prima facie defective summons.”
The statement further says: “The judgment confirms the position of the President that the private prosecution is motivated by the ulterior purpose based on spurious and unfounded charges, constitutes an abuse of private prosecution provisions and demonstrates flagrant disregard for the law.”
Judgment proceedings below:
Zuma has option to appeal
Meanwhile, legal analyst Elton Heart says Zuma still has an option to appeal the judgment.
“President Zuma at this point in time cannot do anything until they have dealt with Part B. Also, what former president Zuma can do is most probably appeal this decision that was taken today because that’s also one of the remedies that he has at his disposal to actually set aside the order that was made today. But they will subject themselves to the Deputy Judge President so that they can make arrangement for hearing Part B and setting it down but President Cyril Ramaphosa in his personal capacity as Cyril Matamela Ramaphosa will not appear in court on the 19th.”
