Zuma could lose his pension if he fails to repay the R28.9 million that the government spent on his legal fees.
Former president Jacob Zuma will continue to fight for his constitutional rights and to seek justice from “fair-minded courts that remain true to the principles of our constitution”, and may seek damages from the state.
This is according to the Jacob Zuma Foundation, in response to the R28.9 million that Zuma has to repay to the government for his legal fees.
Pay back the money
Zuma suffered yet another blow at the Gauteng High Court on Wednesday after Judge Anthony Millar ruled that the former president was personally liable for the legal expenses in his long-running arms deal corruption case.
This means Zuma could lose his pension if he fails to repay the R28.9 million that the government spent on his legal fees.
ALSO READ: Zuma Foundation distances itself from fundraising initiatives to repay Zuma’s R28.9m legal bill
Disappointment
The JG Zuma Foundation has expressed its deep disappointment and firm protest against last week’s Gauteng High Court judgment.
It slammed the judgment, saying in its own findings, the court held that the state acted “unlawfully and unconstitutionally” in relation to the payment of Zuma’s legal fees.
The Foundation’s spokesperson, Mzwanele Manyi, said, “In a troubling contradiction,” the court held Zuma “personally liable for the consequences of that very unconstitutional conduct.”
“The Court’s reasoning, that President Zuma benefited from the state’s unlawful conduct, is fundamentally flawed.
“There can be no benefit where a citizen is now punished and made to pay for the state’s unconstitutional actions. The undeniable fact is that President Zuma derived no benefit whatsoever from the payments made by the state, which are now being claimed from him,” Manyi said.
‘Unconstitutional conduct’
Manyi said instead of applying the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) to hold the responsible officials accountable for unauthorised expenditure, the court excused the state’s “unconstitutional conduct and shifted the entire burden onto an innocent party.”
“This approach reflects a concerning lack of balance and a failure to uphold the constitutional principles of fairness and accountability,” Manyi said.
Manyi added that the court failed to exercise its broad constitutional discretion under section 172 of the Constitution, which empowers it to grant just and equitable orders in dealing with unconstitutional conduct.
ALSO READ: Zuma’s MK party rejects claims it’s funded by Louis Liebenberg [VIDEO]
DA’s request
Manyi expressed concern that the court granted an order for Zuma to pay interest on the R28.9 million, as requested by the DA.
“By granting this, the court ignored established jurisprudence and fairness. It is neither just nor equitable to hold only [former] president Zuma liable for the consequences of the state’s unlawful actions. A constitutionally compliant order would have recognised his rights and absolved him of any liability for conduct that was not his own.
“Indeed, [former] president Zuma is entitled to consider pursuing a damages claim against the state for the immense financial and personal harm he continues to endure because of this injustice,” Manyi said.
‘Declining judicial reasoning’
Manyi reiterated the Foundation’s concern about the “declining quality of judicial reasoning and inconsistency” in the application of constitutional principles, which “undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.”
“A judgment that holds a citizen financially responsible for the state’s unconstitutional conduct fails the most basic test of fairness and justice.
“It is therefore deeply unjust that the Court found it ‘just and equitable’ to award the DA interest running into millions of rands and to authorise the attachment of [former] president Zuma’s pension,” Manyi said.
Manyi said the Foundation remains confident that “true justice will ultimately prevail, and that no citizen should ever suffer for the unlawful conduct of the state.”
ALSO READ: Zuma Foundation awaiting briefing from Zuma before commenting on R28m judgment
