ConCourt to rule on Zuma impeachment case on Friday

Nick Sanchez
January 1, 2018

South Africa's top court says that parliament failed to comply with its duties in holding President Jacob Zuma accountable over a public funding case.

The governing African National Congress tried to use its majority in Parliament to shield Zuma from liability, but the Constitutional Court ruled a year ago that he'd violated his oath of office by failing to comply with Madonsela's directive and ordered the Treasury to determine how much he owed. In October the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the National Prosecuting Authority to drop corruption charges against Zuma and ordered the president must face those charges in court.

They also sought an order compelling Mbete to establish a committee, or any independent body, to investigate Zuma's conduct and determine whether he is guilty of any offence.

A South African judge has ruled the country's legislature must now set out rules of impeachment for President Jacob Zuma.

Newsmen report that in March 2016, the court ruled that Zuma pay back some of the roughly $15 million in state money spent upgrading his private home.

"We conclude that the assembly did not hold the president to account". Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng disagreed with the judgment, describing it as "a textbook case of judicial overreach".

Together, these developments will give rise to new calls to strip Zuma of his position before South Africa's next presidential election in 2019, in which he can not participate, promising more trouble ahead for the lame-duck president.

"Properly interpreted, Section 89 implicitly imposes an obligation on the assembly to make rules specially tailored for the removal of the president from office".

Zuma, 75, is already in a weakened position after Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa was narrowly elected leader of Zuma's ruling African National Congress (ANC) last week - although Zuma's faction still retains key positions in the party and he has already survived no-confidence votes. "This is really now Ramaphosa's first real test to see if he can navigate a course for an earlier exit for Zuma with as limited a fallout as possible for the ANC".

The court ruled that parliament, where the ANC holds a commanding majority, needed to act within 180 days.

Other reports by AllAboutTopnews

Discuss This Article