Avatar photo

By Brian Sokutu

Senior Print Journalist


Ramaphosa ‘not safe from RET or his own supporters within the ANC’

Presidential spokesperson said the judgment 'affirmed all of the president's key contentions.'


With Jacob Zuma's bid to drag President Cyril Ramaphosa to court crashing, political analysts are cautioning that the radical economic transformation (RET) faction of the ANC is likely to employ more politically-motivated tactics. This after the High Court in Johannesburg yesterday handed down a judgment interdicting the private prosecution brought against Ramaphosa. Presidency's reaction Reacting to the ruling, presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the judgment “affirmed all of the president's key contentions”: Jurisdiction of the court to hear the interdict application.Urgency of the matter against a court appearance date based on a prima facie unlawful nolle prosequi.A finding in Ramaphosa's…

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

With Jacob Zuma’s bid to drag President Cyril Ramaphosa to court crashing, political analysts are cautioning that the radical economic transformation (RET) faction of the ANC is likely to employ more politically-motivated tactics.

This after the High Court in Johannesburg yesterday handed down a judgment interdicting the private prosecution brought against Ramaphosa.

Presidency’s reaction

Reacting to the ruling, presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the judgment “affirmed all of the president’s key contentions”:

  • Jurisdiction of the court to hear the interdict application.
  • Urgency of the matter against a court appearance date based on a prima facie unlawful nolle prosequi.
  • A finding in Ramaphosa’s favour on the violation of rights to personal freedom, based on a prima facie defective summons.

“The judgment confirms the position of the president that the private prosecution is motivated by the ulterior purpose – based on spurious and unfounded charges, constituting an abuse of private prosecution provisions and demonstrating flagrant disregard for the law,” said Magwenya.

ALSO READ: High court grants Ramaphosa urgent interdict against Zuma’s private prosecution

‘Win for Ramaphosa, defeat for RET forces

While conceding that the court judgment constituted a blow to Zuma, seen as the embodiment of the RET forces championing a campaign to unseat Ramaphosa, political analyst Dr Melanie Verwoerd said: “The battle is far from over.

“This in itself, is a win for the Ramaphosa fight and a defeat for the RET forces, but certainly not the end of attempts by the RET faction to mobilise against the president. It is very clear that [RET] will continue to try and mobilise against him.

“The fact that they are so intent on getting Ramaphosa on the stand, clearly illustrates the political motive behind this prosecution.

“Pushing to humiliate him – showing him in the dock, is a very clear indication of the politically driven motivation behind this prosecution.”

‘Battle is going to continue’

Independent political expert Sandile Swana said Ramaphosa was “not safe from the RET or his own supporters within the ANC”.

“The real fight is about Ramaphosa not having provided enough cover for Zuma.

“The ANC internal battle might seem to be have a lot to do with legal technicalities, but politically, it is about the idea that the ANC should continue to serve as a protection racket, with companies doing business with the ANC and comrades taking bribes from such entities.

“This battle is going to continue for quite some time until the ANC is properly defeated in the polls.

“He won’t stay comfortably in office if he does not offer protection to the comrades for offences that they have committed.

Expert weighs in

Legal expert Ulrich Roux described the order handed down by the court as “correct”.

“Zuma’s private prosecution of Ramaphosa has been flawed from the outset, given that there is no nolle prosequi certificate issued in the name of President Ramaphosa.”

“Legally, the president was not obliged to act on a Zuma complaint about National Prosecution Authority prosecutor Billy Downer, because of the separation of powers doctrine.”

NOW READ: UPDATE: NPA backs Ramaphosa, says no private prosecution certificate issued to Zuma

Access premium news and stories

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