Deputy President Jacob Zuma on Friday welcomed Public Protector Lawrence Mushwana’s report on the complaint he lodged against National Director of Public Prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka, saying he felt ”vindicated”.
In the report, released on Friday, Mushwana found it was ”unfair and improper” to say publicly there was a prima facie case of corruption against Zuma but that he would not be prosecuted.
Mushwana said in the report that a public statement by Ngcuka had impaired Zuma’s dignity and improperly prejudiced him.
Ngcuka issued a media statement in August 2003 saying there was a prima facie case of corruption against Zuma over the multi-billion rand arms deal, but he would not prosecute him as the chances of success were not strong enough.
Much public debate and media speculation about Zuma’s possible corrupt involvement in the SA National Defence Force’s arms procurement followed.
Zuma then complained to the Public Protector about Ngcuka’s remark and about:
- the way in which the criminal investigation against him was conducted;
- leaks to the media by the prosecuting authority of information about the investigation;
- the authority’s failure to inform Zuma that he was under investigation; and
- the apparent continuation of the investigation after the decision not to prosecute.
Mushwana also found that Ngcuka and former justice minister Penuell Maduna had failed to cooperate with his (Mushwana’s) investigation.
Maduna and Ngcuka repeatedly said the subject matter of Zuma’s complaint was sub judice — a claim Mushwana dismissed. He said their refusal to cooperate was ”improper and unconstitutional”.
Mushwana also found that Ngcuka and Maduna had probably not informed Zuma of the investigation as claimed. Since Maduna was no longer in the cabinet, no action against him was recommended.
The Public Protector recommended that Parliament take urgent steps to hold Ngcuka responsible for his ”unfair and improper” behaviour towards Zuma and his failure to cooperate with Mushwana’s investigation.
A statement issued by the presidency later on Friday said Zuma felt ”vindicated by the report, which has confirmed his contention that the National Directorate for Public Prosecutions violated his Constitutional rights”.
”While he is still to study the report in detail, he is satisfied with the general findings,” the presidency said.
Zuma was however, disappointed that some aspects of his complaint were not dealt with due to the failure of Ngcuka and Maduna to cooperate with Mushwana and provide answers.
”The deputy president is particularly pleased with the finding that the press statement by the National Director on 23 August 2003, that there was a prima facie case of corruption against him, but that he would not prosecute, unjustifiably infringed upon his constitutional right to human dignity and that it was unfair and improper.”
Zuma also welcomed Mushwana’s questioning of the motives of the NDPP, in not including in the same statement the comprehensive written response that he had provided to the NDPP, refuting among others the allegation that he attempted to solicit a bribe from an arms manufacturer. This would have enabled the public to hear both sides.
”The NDPP statement convicted the Deputy President of corruption without a trial, and without providing an opportunity for self-defence, leaving him to be sentenced by the media.
”The deputy president wishes to, once again, reiterate his innocence and emphasise that any statement that he attempted to, or actually solicited a bribe from anybody or any institution is ludicrous and baseless,” the presidency said.
In its reaction, the ANC called on Parliament to give the report and its recommendations due and proper consideration.
The party would reserve further comment until Parliament had had an opportunity to exercise its responsibility in this matter, said ANC spokesperson Smuts Ngonyama.
The Democratic Alliance said it was a very serious matter when the Public Protector found that both the former justice minister and the head of public prosecutions seemed to have abused their powers.
”There are more issues at play here than just the allegations of abuse of power levelled against Mr Ngcuka. Questions can be asked about the conduct and the roles played by most parties involved in this matter; a parliamentary debate… is the perfect platform to raise these questions and bring the matter to a close,” said DA MP Sheila Camerer. – Sapa