South Africa: Conflict over Zuma’s corruption charges

In less than two weeks, South Africans will head to the election poles to vote for their future president. The main contender is Jacob Zuma, a 66 year-old former guerrilla leader, who is currently chief of the African National Congress. Earlier this month, corruption charges against Zuma were dropped angering South Africa’s rival political parties including the Democratic Alliance and the Independent Democrats.

According to the National Prosecuting Authority, the case was aborted because of political interference. After the charges were dropped by the High Court in Durban, South Africa’s main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance filed an application for judicial review of Zuma’s case. Jonah Fisher from BBC news reports that the Democratic Alliance believes the National Prosecution Authority is being used as a tool of the Zuma faction under the ANC. Although the issue of political interference prevented the case from moving forward, Patricia de Lille, the leader of the Independent Democrats argues that the issue of interference is a completely separate matter from the substantive evidence against Zuma. Although Zuma contends that he has not committed a crime against the South Africa’s people, de Lille believes that the evidence possessed by the National Prosecuting Authority must still be tested before his guilty is determined.

The charges against Zuma stem from South Africa’s controversial arms deal in 1999. Originally, the arms deal was supposed to modernise South Africa’s national defence force. The arms deal included contracts with Germany, Italy, Sweden, Britain, and France. Several years following the deal, Zuma’s financial advisor Schabir Shaik was convicted of taking bribes from Thint, a French arms company. In 2005, Zuma was also charged for taking bribes from Shaik to prevent the French subsidiary from being investigated.

In light of the charges, the National Prosecuting Authority found that Leonard McCarthy, the former head of the Scorpion investigative unit and Bulelani Ngcuka, husband of Mr. Mbeki’s vice-president, had interfered with Zuma’s prosecution. According to Mokoledi Mpshe, the acting director of public prosecutions, McCarthy and Ngcuka had sought to influence the timing of the case. Due to the interference, the presiding judge on the case, Vusi Tshabalala overturned the case. However, Judge Tshabalala did acknowledge that his decision was not an acquittal. As a result, Zuma has not been able to clear his name.

Although Zuma is favoured to win the elections and corruption charges have been dropped, Sebastian Berger, a Telegraph correspondent believes ramifications from the corruption case will have a ripple effect on South Africa’s politics and its prominent political figures. Already, South Africa’s Independent Democrat leader, de Lille, has filed charges against McCarthy and Ngcuka for interfering with the prosecution.

In light of Zuma’s legal battles, it remains to be seen how his party’s support and performance will be affected in the upcoming elections on April 22.