On Wednesday, former president Jacob Zuma said he would not be filing an affidavit to the ConCourt – and in a 21-page letter to chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, he explained why.
The directive from the Constitutional Court to former president Jacob Zuma asking him for an affidavit on an appropriate penalty should it find him in contempt of court was “nothing but a stratagem to clothe its decision with some legitimacy”.
Zuma made the comment in a letter to the ConCourt on Wednesday.
The court had set Wednesday as the deadline given to the former president for the affidavit it sought from him in the application brought by the State Capture Commission, which asked the court to imprison Zuma for two years for contempt of court. The application was made after Zuma did not turn up at the commission to give evidence in February in line with a summons, despite an order from the highest court to do so.
When the application was made and argued, Zuma chose not to participate and did not file any court papers to oppose the application. The highest court has, therefore, only heard the commission’s side.
In its direction on April 9, it asked Zuma to submit an affidavit on two issues. First, on what would be an appropriate sanction should the court find him in contempt. And second, if the court “deems committal to be appropriate”, on the “nature and magnitude of sentence that should be imposed, supported by reasons”.
On Wednesday, Zuma said he would not be filing an affidavit and, in a 21-page letter to chief justice Mogoeng Mogoeng, he explained why.
Zuma said the directions were a “sham and an attempt to sanitise the gravity of the repressive manner in which the court has dealt with my issues”.