THE SMART NEWS SOURCE | Feb 09 2010 22:53 | LAST UPDATED Feb 09 2010 22:53 |
|
The African National Congress's (ANC) parliamentary caucus has asked party lawyers to review the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) Act in the wake of the Supreme Court of Appeal's (SCA) judgement in the Jacob Zuma case, the ruling party's chief whip said on Tuesday. Mnyamezeli Booi said Monday's judgement, which reinstated fraud and corruption charges against presidential front-runner Zuma, raised questions about the powers of the NPA that had to be resolved. "It is about the authority. Where does it rest?" he told reporters at a briefing called to name the ANC members of Parliament's ad hoc committee which would study President Kgalema Motlanthe's decision to fire NPA chief Vusi Pikoli. "What has the judge seen that we have not seen? What is the problem with the Act? Or is it about how the NPA has conducted itself?" he asked. Booi said the Act governing the independent prosecutions authority might have to be amended because the latest two judgements in the Zuma case showed that senior judges disagreed in their interpretation of the law. The chief whip denied suggestions that the ANC's interest in the matter sprang from the fact that its leader was involved in a protracted battle with the NPA that had cast a cloud over the party's election campaign and his presidential candidacy. The SCA judgement on Monday vindicated the NPA's position that it was not obliged to invite representations from Zuma before charging him, overruling the controversial Pietermaritzburg High Court decision by Judge Chris Nicholson in September that let him off the hook. "It is not about the president. It is our duty as legislators to look at how the NPA Act is interpreted," he insisted. The ad hoc committee studying the Pikoli case will begin sitting on Wednesday and will have until February 9 to make a recommendation to the two houses of Parliament on whether to approve his dismissal. Oupa Monareng, whom the ANC has proposed as chairperson of the committee, said it would invite representations from Pikoli and would also ask Motlanthe if he wanted to elaborate on his reasons for firing him. Pikoli was suspended in September 2007 by former president Thabo Mbeki, who cited a breakdown in trust between the prosecutions chief and then justice minister Brigitte Mabandla. But Pikoli alleges he was sidelined over the NPA's decision to push ahead with corruption charges against now-suspended national police chief Jackie Selebi. The Ginwala commission of inquiry found last year that Pikoli was fit to hold office, but Motlanthe refused to reinstate him. The president based his decision on a remark in Ginwala's report that Pikoli's handling of the Selebi case had shown insufficient regard for national security. Pikoli took a decision to charge Zuma in 2005, two years after his predecessor Bulelani Ngcuka said there was a prima facie case of corruption against the senior politician but that he would not be prosecuted. Mbeki pleased with SCA ruling Meanwhile, on Tuesday Mbeki said he was pleased with Monday's SCA ruling that found no evidence of meddling by himself or the Cabinet in the Zuma prosecution. In a statement Mbeki said: "I welcome and accept the determinations made by the SCA that Judge [Chris] Nicholson had no facts before him to suggest that I and the Cabinet interfered with the NPA in its consideration of matters relating to Mr Jacob Zuma. "I agree with the SCA where it says Judge Nicholson made 'gratuitous findings against persons who were not called upon to defend themselves; [failed] to distinguish between allegation, fact and suspicion; and [transgressed] the proper boundaries between judicial, executive and legislative functions'. "Accordingly, I also agree with the SCA where it says, 'Most of the allegations [of political interference] were not only irrelevant but they were gratuitous and based on suspicion and not on fact'." He agreed there was no evidence to support a finding that suggested a strategy involving former justice minister Penuell Maduna, himself and other Cabinet members, as well as a causal connection between himself the Cabinet and former NPA head Bulelani Ngcuka on the Zuma case. "They were instead part of the judge's own conspiracy theory and not one advanced by Mr Zuma," said the statement. "Like the SCA, we had found the manner by which Judge Nicholson made negative findings against the president and the Cabinet 'incomprehensible'." Mbeki said he and the Cabinet had intervened in the NPA's appeal to the SCA because they wanted to correct the "unfair and unwarranted inferences" made by Nicholson against them. "... And as the SCA said, we 'had ample reason to be upset by the reasons in the judgment which cast aspersions on [us] without regard to [our] basic rights to be treated fairly.' The SCA ruling has vindicated us." He said the SCA had provided leadership on not damaging people's integrity through untested allegations. Mbeki said leaders and citizens should reflect on this practice to avoid the "entrenchment of a culture which may eventually corrupt our society". Mbeki was forced to resign in September 2008 after the Nicholson judgement in the Pietermaritzburg High Court, which led the ruling ANC to say they no longer had faith in the president. The NPA considers Zuma a charged man after the Nicholson judgement was overturned, while Zuma's legal team is considering its next move, which could include an appeal to the Constitutional Court. The actual comments on Mbeki, the Cabinet, Maduna and Ngcuka, and inferences of political meddling were not struck out by the SCA, as the judges believed it would be pointless to do so now, but the NPA's appeal was upheld and the prosecution could continue. - Sapa TOPICS IN THIS ARTICLE
Comments
ANC's 2009-to-do list: (item 1) Rip up the NPA Act. (item 2) Shred the Constitution. (item 3) Purge loyal supporters' list. (item 4) Make marital overtures to Grace Mugabe. (item 5) Electioneer, with fear and favour. [...] (item 6) Bus in more supporters to rallies. (item 7) Buy lozenges for JZ's strained vocal chords. [...] (item 1,929) Raise funds for JZ's legal bills.
Set Lah on January 13, 2009, 4:43 pm
"What is the problem with the Act? Or is it about how the NPA has conducted itself?" he asked."
No Sir: it is about how the ANC conducts itself! As in Zimbabwe, will this never end, and when it does, as all things do, where will we be?
solinus jolliffe on January 13, 2009, 5:11 pm
I think this will set a presedence that whenever the ruling party disagrees with the courts legislation is to be passed to change things to suit them, what;s different with Uncle Bob up North
Shakes George on January 13, 2009, 5:25 pm
ANC will stop at nothing to protect their own and in this case JZ. This is very much worrying as this will lead to elimination of persons who are seen to be counter revolutionaries.
The next move that the ANC is going to take with the suspect (JZ) will be: 1. Approach the Con Court and that will take time before the court could hear his case and go into the election with charges over JZ. 2. JZ will become memebr of parliament and become the President. 3. the ANC if it wins with majority (which I doubt) will then pass a legislation pereventing sitting President to be charged! 4. He will serve with the charges over him 5. Probaly by the end of his term, ANC would have made sure that they would have had someone in the NPA who will make sure the charges dissapear. 6. Zuma live happily there-after I am very, very concerned citizen.
Sea Dinthe on January 13, 2009, 6:11 pm
The only way to solve this problem is for Zuma to go to trial. If the ANC & Zuma continue their appeal to stall procedures against him, one would have to ask why? Zuma continually claim's not guilty, then why are both the ANC & Zuma trying to avoid a court case?Not withstanding the cost of all these appeal's.Zuma's credibility as a person never mind the next president of South Africa should be called into question together with that of the ANC.
You either believe in the countries judiciary system or you try to avoid it at all cost's, ( I hate to put a price on this one). Becauase an honest justice process will always (Or bearing in mind this is new South Africa).convict the guilty party. Are we, the pawns in this fiasco ever going to be given the opportunity to find out the truth about Zuma? I truly hope we are. Viva the truth.
David Howarth on January 13, 2009, 7:33 pm
"Mnyamezeli Booi said Monday's judgement, which reinstated fraud and corruption charges against presidential front-runner Zuma, raised questions about the powers of the NPA that had to be resolved." What is meant is that, as with Parliament's treatment of the 200 plus past and present MPs, including cabinet ministers, the law should be changed so that these ANC miscreants will no longer face investigation, criminal prosecuation nor recovery of debt unless the ANC specifically approves it. Mr Booi has a vested interest. The Courts can clearly look after their own affairs (so far as the Constitutions presently allows them)
Harry Charlton on January 14, 2009, 12:06 am
If all appeals fail, just get rid of the prosecuting authority. What else was expected. Well, with the stepped-up election schedule, even if charges were re-leveled, as they inevitably would be (they were not only appealed extensively dragging things out, but prosecutorial procedural mistakes have been apparently ruled inconsequential - conceivably things could happen), and the apparent threat to dismantle NPA authority, one would also expect an outright immunity law for a sitting president to soon follow, no matter if crimes were committed. It seems the NPA is being pressed for a quick deal to ensure they don't go the way of the Scorpions, Judicial apointments, you name it.
David Hurst on January 14, 2009, 8:05 am
'"It is not about the president. It is our duty as legislators to look at how the NPA Act is interpreted," he insisted.'
How do these people sleep at night? When they look back on their lives do they say, "I'm proud to say that I worked hard to weaken democracy and accountability in my country to support my party's narrow interests?"
Alan Millar on January 14, 2009, 10:31 am
I am generally very grateful of the ANC and the work and effort they have put into bringing us all in to the modern day South Africa.
However their recent behaviours of late have not been something to savour. The execution of personal and party agendas at the expense of governance of the country is not what we bargained for. As a loyal taxpayer and voter, it hurts. And what's worse is that the average citizen is getting more apathetic to the situation... this is not because we don't care anymore, I think we all just resigned ourselves to the fate that we just can't do anything about it. Ofcourse we can vote. That is the right we have and ability for us to execute change. But if I look again, my President is the not same person I voted for in the last election??? On that note, if our President was "recalled" from office due to any statement made by the Honourable Chris Nicholson, and these comments (not judgements) have been over-ruled by the those of higher authority, aren't we the citizens, the voters and the employers of all those in Government owed some form of apology? I really do think this owed to us. I'm generally not a negative individual. I am just extremely disappointed in those we have given the authority to act on our behalf. I guess, it’s going to be once bitten, twice shy.
Avid Reader on January 14, 2009, 12:43 pm
Exactly the same happened in Bob Mugabe's domain. He started off well as the head of a liberation movement and did all the right things that a head of democracy would be expected to do. Until greed set in. Then the number of piggies with their snouts in the trough became greater and greater and they all needed feeding, so he changed the laws, leant on the judiciary and when he at long last ran out of voters (and tax payers money)the rest of the world slowly started to take notice.
Welcome to the Banana Republic of ZA where the ANC is mimicking everything Bob did. The state of the Rand will always show the truth.
Anthony Krijger on January 14, 2009, 1:45 pm
Alan, I'm afraid that they sleep very well at night.......that's the problem. There's so much wealth and prosperity at stake for the individual, they are falling over each other to win JZ's favour. It really IS worth demeaning oneself as a human being, as the riches are plenty....
I only hope karma is apparent on election day, and not in 20 yrs, when we are fatigued from begging for UN assistance. It will catch up with the ANC eventually; perhaps in 2009 if there is a God. If only enough people could wake and smell the coffee in time....
Nahor Ecnarraf on January 14, 2009, 2:09 pm
Some of you may see this move as a way of protecting President Zuma form what you tell. Because President Zuma as he said before, he is fighting his battles in the court of law and I think that is what it means his day in court. But on the NPA Act, I believe it needs to be reviewed in two sections, 1. To allow NPA to charge anyone without consulting either the Minister or the President because this will mean if the President or the Minister concerned will be implicated, the NPA may not have powers to prosecute him/her. 2. The NPA should before deciding to prosecute, invite individuals to make representation as this will be able to save the state lot of money by avoiding unnecessarily prosecutions, e.g. Cde. Ngwako Ramahlodi representation made the Scorpions to realize that they do not have case against him. Imagine if they charged him and realize in court that they do not have case how much will the state have wasted in the case? So this must be compulsory also to avoid inconsistence when treating individual cases. If you can look at this two points objectively you will realize that in fact the ANC is aware that it will be in charge in the next government but it does not to subject its President nor the Minister to influence who must be charged and who must not be charged am sure Jackie Selebi case will also focus your mind to understand what I am implying. If it was not with Adv. Pikoli’s arrogance against the orders given, Selebi will be remaining an uncharged man as we speak.
Let us stop reacting to the ANC actions because we favour other parties but analyze the objective behind the reviewal than individual case. My ANC. My Vision. My Future. ANC Lives! ANC Lead!
Sasabona Manganye on January 14, 2009, 3:26 pm
click here to log in
M&G Online Comment Guidelines In Brief
Advertising Links
|
2,3-million titles to choose from.
iPod nano 16GB - Black, Was R2,499.00 Now R2,299.00! Save R200!
46 000 DVDs and Blu-Ray on sale now!
100s of new releases now in stock. Get the new Sade & Bon Jovi albums.
Widest toy range and unbeatable prices!
AdvertisementsAdvertising links |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||






