Avatar photo

By Editorial staff

Journalist


Zuma’s view of the world different to that of logical people

As legal expert advocate Paul Hoffman pointed out, the proceedings in question were civil contempt proceedings in which Zuma wasn’t entitled to a trial.


Jacob Zuma’s view of the world is, to be kind, different to that of logical people. That was clear on Sunday night when he proclaimed that, if locked up, then he – a man without a conscience in facilitating the state capture project – would become a “prisoner of conscience”. His press conference at his Nkandla homestead was riddled with other claims which are either misleading at best, or downright lies. Clearly, somewhere in his head it makes sense to proclaim that he never refused to appear before the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture. In much the same way,…

Subscribe to continue reading this article
and support trusted South African journalism

Access PREMIUM news, competitions
and exclusive benefits

SUBSCRIBE
Already a member? SIGN IN HERE

Jacob Zuma’s view of the world is, to be kind, different to that of logical people. That was clear on Sunday night when he proclaimed that, if locked up, then he – a man without a conscience in facilitating the state capture project – would become a “prisoner of conscience”.

His press conference at his Nkandla homestead was riddled with other claims which are either misleading at best, or downright lies.

Clearly, somewhere in his head it makes sense to proclaim that he never refused to appear before the Commission of Inquiry into State Capture.

In much the same way, those who tried to cover up the outrageous state bill of R270 million for the Nkandla estate would believe R2 million was spent on a “firepool”, an essential safety feature.

In announcing his plans to move an application to have Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, who’s also chairing the commission, recuse himself, Zuma’s lawyers in September said he would “take no further part” in the proceedings until that application had been finalised.

Zuma on Sunday also claimed he was “lambasted with a punitive jail sentence without a trial” and likened the contempt of court proceedings he was subjected to, to detention without trial under apartheid.

But, as legal expert advocate Paul Hoffman pointed out, the proceedings in question were civil contempt proceedings in which Zuma wasn’t entitled to a trial.

Moreover, Zuma was in fact afforded the opportunity to take part in the contempt of court proceedings more than once. He refused.

The trouble is, though, that Zuma’s deliberately twisted narrative of his persecution will not only have been disseminated far and wide, it will also be believed by his followers. And, sadly, in this country, logic and facts always struggle to be heard.

Read more on these topics

Editorials Jacob Zuma

Access premium news and stories

Access to the top content, vouchers and other member only benefits