NPA not charging Zuma seen as political

Johannesburg - National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) boss advocate Shaun Abrahams ventured into a political minefield when he decided to appeal against the ruling setting aside the decision not to charge President Jacob Zuma for corruption.

Experts and politicians on Monday criticised his decision, questioned the NPA's independence and implied that he had bowed to political pressure.

Abrahams told journalists in Pretoria: “I have given instruction to the state attorney to go ahead with the application for leave to appeal.

“I was not part of the decision to withdraw the charges against Zuma. I have taken legal advice from senior and junior counsel. I will carry out my duties irrespective of who the suspect is without fear or favour,” he said.

The 2009 decision by the then NPA head Mokotedi Mpshe to drop the charges was based on the fact that prosecutors were right to exercise their prosecutorial discretion.

“These are matters that should be left to the NPA. I will not be a passenger in anyone’s vehicle,” Abrahams said.

However, legal expert advocate Francois Botes warned the NPA against being caught in a political game to protect Zuma.

Botes said the NPA was playing for time and trying to avoid the unavoidable.

“There is no prospect of success in the Supreme Court of Appeal,” he said.

He said the NPA should consider the charges against Zuma on whether there were merits to prosecute.

“The NPA should not get involved in the political minefield to save Zuma’s political career.” He added that the judgment by the full Bench was comprehensive, well reasoned and properly articulated.

Deputy Judge President of the high court in Pretoria Aubrey Ledwaba had found that Mpshe's decision was irrational. He ruled that the matter be reviewed.

Professor Dirk Kotze, of the department of political sciences at Unisa, said the decision to appeal was delaying arguably the most difficult decision for the NPA.

He said the matter was political and it was impossible to claim that political considerations or pressure were not part of it.

Abrahams said the NPA would not charge Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan for his alleged involvement in the establishment of a rogue unit at the South African Revenue Service. No charges of espionage against Gordhan had been brought to his attention.

But Kotze said that announcement established by implication a link between the Zuma and Gordhan situations.

“The NPA demonstrated its independence by not responding to political pressure to charge Gordhan, and that independence applies also to its decision not to charge Zuma. Therefore, in effect, Gordhan’s non-charge legitimises Zuma non-charge in terms of logic,” he said.

DA leader Mmusi Maimane said the decision was a delaying tactic to shield Zuma from facing 783 charges of racketeering, corruption and fraud. He said the NPA effectively told citizens that more public money would fund the process to delay Zuma from having his day in court.

“Zuma should face the charges as outlined in the indictment,” he said.

Maimane cast doubt over Abrahams’s independence to proceed with the prosecution. “The reasons advanced by Abrahams that he was acting in the best interests of prosecutorial independence are a farce,” he said.

Cope spokesman Dennis Bloem said the party wasn't surprised by the decision and doubted Abrahams’s independence.

“For Abrahams to suggest the court was wrong to come to the decision it did and that furthermore such a decision attacked the separation of powers is totally absurd,” he said.