Home

Zuma’s legal team, family dismayed by warrant of arrest

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Former President Jacob Zuma‘s legal team and his family are dismayed by the Pietermaritzburg High Court’s decision to issue a warrant for his arrest. This is after Zuma failed to appear in court.

However, the warrant will only be effected if he does not show up for the next appearance in May. The judge was not satisfied with the content and the authenticity of the medical note handed in by Zuma’s Advocate Daniel Mantsha.

“This is spiteful, vindictive and persecution of Zuma by the State,” said Mantsha reacting to the State’s submission that a warrant be issued for Zuma’s arrest.

The State argued that while Zuma had informed them that he will be unable to appear in court due to medical reasons, the former President had failed to submit a medical note on time. State Prosecutor Advocate Billy Downer said this is a criminal procedure.

“I submit my Lady in terms of Section 70 it is a criminal offence for the accused not to be in court having been warned by the court to be in court. The procedure as we understand it, the court has to hold an inquiry relating to justified reasons for the absence, if it is medically related obviously we are obliged to assist the court to evaluate the nature of medical evidence, any exceptions in criminal proceedings being that the accused remains under the jurisdiction of the criminal court,  the postponement has to be subjected to the issuing of a warrant of arrest.”

Zuma’s defence submitted a medical note from 1 Military Hospital in court. They also said that the former President has been sick since last year.

The team added that this year he underwent two operations and is currently seeking medical treatment abroad. However, Judge Dhaya Pillay was not satisfied with the medical note and issued a warrant of arrest.

“Counsel for Mr Zuma was notified in advance in the middle of January that sound evidence is required to justify his absence from court and without that evidence this court cannot do anything else but issue a warrant of arrest. It is not only Mr Zuma who is entitled to a speedy trial,  it is accused two who also has this right as Mr Mantswa pointed out, but the rights of the accused are also well stated in the Constitution and no one accused to be preferred over the other in warrant of arrests.  I do nothing more than what the law requires me to do in the circumstances.”

The Zuma family also expressed their disappointment.

“We see it as unfair treatment because in many occasions we have been attending the court, accused number two has been absent in court but this treatment did not happen,” said family member Super Zuma.

Both Zuma and French Defence firm Thales have filed applications with the Supreme Court of Appeal to appeal an earlier judgment that dismissed their application for a permanent stay of prosecution. The State says it will oppose both applications.

Author

MOST READ