The ANC is of the view that at no point has the president defied the recommendations made by Public Protector Thuli Madonsela nor indicated unwillingness to comply with her report in relation to the Nkandla case.

In her report, Madonsela requires Zuma to pay back part of the money spent on security upgrades at his private home in Nkandla, KwaZulu-Natal Province. The project allegedly abused public funding worth 246 million rand (about 15 million U.S. dollars).

The Concourt in Johannesburg was hearing a lawsuit brought forward by the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the Democratic Alliance (DA) which hold Zuma accountable for the project.

The ANC welcomes the Concourt application over the Nkandla debacle, but “it It is unfortunate the matter relating to the President has been negatively politicized by the EFF and DA”, ANC national spokesperson Zizi Kodwa said.

The ANC insists Zuma never said he wouldn’t comply with Madonsela’s findings, Kodwa said.

The issue is that Madonsela is forcing her recommendations, as per her terms, and is disregarding the recommendations directed by Parliament and the executive, which are the organs with the power to implement the “appropriate remedial action” the Public Protector has recommended, said Kodwa.

“The ANC takes great pride in South Africa’s maturing democracy and has full confidence in our judicial system to provide answers to the vexing questions of our time,” Kodwa said.

As the hearing was continuing, hundreds of EFF supporters held a march outside the court, shouting”pay back the money”.

The EFF said it is determined to prove Zuma breached oath of office.

Police set up barbed wire to seperate EFF supporters from the court.

The DA and EFF have asked the court to declare the Public Protector’s report on Nkandla binding.

The DA was also trying to make out a case for deliberate defiance by Zuma in relation to Madonsela’s report.
But Madonsela told the court that it is irrelevant whether or not Zuma deliberately defied her report.

This relates to the president’s stance that the Public Protector’s findings were mere recommendations and are not binding.

Zuma’s lawyer Jeremy Gauntlett conceded during the hearing that the Public Protector’s findings into security upgrades at Nkandla were in fact binding.

Earlier this month, Zuma voiced his willingness to pay back some money as recommended by Madonsela, but at an amount to be determined by the finance minister and auditor-general. His proposal has been rejected by the EFF and DA. Enditem



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.