ConCourt saved from contempt

In the upcoming days, former president Jacob Zuma must begin his 15-month jail sentence. 

This after the Constitutional Court's historic judgment which found him in contempt of its order to appear before the State Capture commission.

By any measure, it is a remarkable moment for our constitutional democracy, one that should be welcomed as a strong affirmation of the rule of law in our country.

Zuma has consistently shown his disdain for accountability. In so doing, he has undermined the very constitution he twice swore to defend and uphold when he took his presidential oath.

Not only that, he continued to insult the court, casting baseless aspersions on the judiciary in a bid to delegitimise its jurisprudence in the eyes of the public.

Yesterday, the court was clear – such disdain for its authority as the final guardian of our constitution will not be tolerated.

Not because individual judges or the court itself should be shielded from public scrutiny, but as the judgement said, Zuma’s utterances went beyond what could be considered acceptable criticism of the judiciary.

He was callous and egregious in his lies, driven by a desire to malign the court in the eyes of ordinary citizens. For this he had to to held accountable.

Delivering her judgment yesterday, Justice Sisi Khampepe said: "Indeed, if we do not intervene immediately to send a clear message to the public that this conduct stands to be rebuked in the strongest of terms, there is a real and imminent risk that a mockery will be made of this court and the judicial process in the eyes of the public. 

"The vigour with which Mr Zuma is peddling his disdain of this court and the judicial process carries the further risk that he will inspire or incite others to similarly defy this court, the judicial process and the rule of law.” 

Predictably, Zuma’s supporters have sought to exploit the differences in the two judgments delivered by the court. They suggest that the minority judgment, which differed in some aspects, means that there is a constitutional crisis.

Nothing could be further from the truth. 

Both judgments affirm that Zuma is indeed guilty of contempt and differ on the appropriateness of the process of deciding the sanction. 

Ultimately, yesterday our apex court asserted its authority and the fundamental principle that no one is above the law.