As tensions rose in Nkandla, KwaZulu-Natal, yesterday, behind the scenes the ANC was at pains to convince former president Jacob Zuma to calm the raging crowds who broke lockdown regulations and put on a show of force to support him.
But Zuma came out and thanked his supporters for what he claimed was their fight to protect the constitution.
FULL ADDRESS | Zuma speaks in Nkandla after meeting with lawyers
Subscribe for free: iono.fm | Spotify | Apple Podcasts | Pocket Casts | Player.fm
Yesterday was the last day for Zuma to hand himself to the police to begin his 15-month jail term as per the order of the Constitutional Court, which found him guilty of contempt. But his supporters would have none of it, saying no-one would arrest him .
At one point, a thick blue line of armed police stood guard, blocking the road as more supporters flocked to Nkandla. After brief negotiations with the police, they were allowed to get closer to the homestead in time for Zuma’s address to them.
Asked about Luthuli House’s intervention to manage the situation, ANC national spokesperson Pule Mabe referred questions to the provincial secretary, Mdumiseni Ntuli.
“Why is he referring you to me because he’s our national spokesperson who speaks on behalf of everyone, including me?” Ntuli initially protested.
Ntuli then warned the party not to adopt a hard stance as it may lead to a violent conflict that would make it impossible for the ANC to control the province. He said the ANC had to tread carefully. “The ANC must not concern itself with the enforcement of the ConCourt judgment but its devastating consequences.”
Ntuli said KwaZulu-Natal had a history of violence, which needed dedicated efforts to ensure that it doesn’t happen again. “KwaZulu-Natal is not like other provinces... there are circumstances that we must understand for what they are. If we descend to a violent period, it will be difficult to regain the stability of the province.”
Ntuli said he and provincial chairperson Sihle Zikalala had agreed with Zuma that he would address his supporters to ensure that there won’t be any violence.
“Comrade Zuma is certainly agreeing with us that we must avoid at all costs anything that may result in an outbreak of violence or a confrontation with the police and those who have come to his house to support him,” Ntuli said.
Addressing the crowd, Zuma made no call for calm and only presented himself as a victim of persecution by detractors in the state and judiciary.
Asked why ANC members had been allowed to gather, Ntuli said the current level 4 Covid-19 restrictions made it difficult for the party to intervene in Nkandla.
What next?
Zuma has pinned his hopes of evading arrest on an application to the high court in Pietermaritzburg where he is seeking an interdict to prevent police minister Bheki Cele and national police commissioner Kehla Sitole from effecting his arrest. He wants that court to hear the matter tomorrow.
As per the ConCourt order, police must arrest Zuma by Wednesday.
Yesterday, police minister Bheki Cele’s spokesperson Lirandzu Themba said the minister would abide by the ConCourt order.
“The court ruling was quite clear that when five days lapses, the police minister and national commissioner must act within three days. This has not happened. However, the minister is on record as saying that when the court makes such a ruling, law agencies will act.”
Law expert Dr Llewellyn Curlewis from the University of Pretoria told Sowetan that the Constitutional Court ruling stands and has to be effected.
Curlewis said the order against Zuma was issued as a criminal conviction and in terms of the Criminal Procedures Act, you can only suspend the operations of a sentence if one files an application for leave to appeal or a review application.
“This is a rescission application, which falls within the parameters of the civil procedures act, so that [is where] the problem comes in... From a criminal law application there’s no application that suspends the order [of the ConCourt],” Curlewis said.
University of Cape Town law professor Cathy Powell said it was surprising that the ConCourt had agreed to hearing Zuma on the matter because in her view, the former statesman had failed to meet the requirements for a rescission.
She said the requirements for a rescission application were in cases where a sanction was granted with the defendant not being aware of it and not being afforded the opportunity to put across his side of the story, and in instances where there was a serious legal error in judgment.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.