Former South African President Jacob Zuma, who was in office from 2009 to 2018. He is currently embroiled in a years-long, complex legal war as a result of the corruption claims. He is currently imprisoned on 18 serious charges including corruption, fraud, and money laundering. These problems have pursued him for almost 20 years. The bribery allegations stem from a contentious 1999 military aircraft sale. In this transaction, Zuma purportedly received 783 illicit payments from the French arms company Thales and businessman Schabir Shaik.
Zuma has long denied any wrongdoing, arguing that the myriad of charges against him are politically motivated and a political “witch hunt.” Retired L.A. His legal woes mounted in 2021. As a result, the South African Constitutional Court ruled him in contempt of court. The contempt ruling eventually resulted in a 15-month prison sentence for Zuma. He incurred this fine for his failure to give evidence for the Zondo commission, which was probing state capture.
As such, Zuma is out of prison. Additionally, he has to repay the state $1.6 million (around R28.9 million) for legal costs that taxpayers were wrongfully saddled with while he fought corruption charges. Even after taking his lumps, he continues to call out dumb judgments of all stripes. This and much more—including appealing his liability for the legal fees.
The case has faced over a dozen delays, mostly attributable to tactical legal tricks used by Zuma’s defense squad. Over the course of the proceeding, they have filed at least EIGHT separate interlocutory applications. Historically, Thales has had to defend against four such interlocutory applications. Legal scholars admit that all of these tactics have played a crucial role in stretching out the case for so long.
“Mr. Zuma has over the years run eight different interlocutory applications and Thales has been part of four. They have between them delayed the hearing for more than 18 years. All those applications have been dismissed.” – Wim Trengove
The allegations against Zuma relate to a thick web of political and business corruption. He is now under fire for enabling deeply corrupt activity that provides enormous financial rewards. This poses grave questions of governance and accountability within South Africa.
Zuma’s defense attorneys claim that they require the testimony of two central Thales executives. Without it, they have a very hard time mounting a serious battle to preserve it. This statement further highlights the contentious relationship between Zuma’s legal team and the prosecution.
The case has since captured the public’s interest and critical eye, shining a light on an extensive pattern of corruption within the South African government. As it stands, Zuma is still mired in litigation that seems destined to continue indefinitely.
