/ 21 September 2006

The collapse of the Zuma case

The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has not showered itself with glory in their dealings with the Jacob Zuma affair.

The decision by Judge Qedusizi Msimang to strike the Zuma matter off the roll is a public-relations disaster which started with National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) boss Bulelani Ngcuka declaring in 2003 that he had a “prima facie” against Zuma. He said he would not prosecute Msholozi because he did not think the state had a “winnable” case.

We will probably never know whether Ngcuka’s actions were motivated by his belief in the rule of law or were driven by political considerations. Whatever the reason, the “prima facie” gaffe amounted to trial by innuendo in the court of public opinion and had the effect of lending credence to the idea of a politico-judicial campaign against the African National Congress (ANC) deputy president.

Wednesday’s court decision will certainly reinforce the view that Zuma is a victim of political intrigue and that the Schabir Shaik trial was always about undermining Zuma’s chances of becoming ANC president in 2007 and that of the country in 2009.

The NPA now finds itself in an invidious position. If they reinstitute charges against Zuma they may be met with a hostile public response particularly from Zuma supporters who will see it as a vindictive act aimed at bringing the alleged conspiracy back on course.

If they walk away from the matter after investing so much money, time and other resources, the conspiracy theory will gain more currency and the image of the NPA and South Africa’s criminal justice system will suffer severe damage. The only thing that can wipe the egg from the NPA’s face is Zuma’s conviction.

For Msholozi the decision of the court may turn out to be either the best or worst thing that has happened to him since his acquittal on rape charges earlier in the year.

Striking the matter off the roll amounts to an indefinite postponement and, therefore, exposes Zuma to the possibility of the NPA reinstituting charges at a time that may be politically infelicitous for him.

If, on the other hand, the NPA loses its appetite and walks away, Zuma will emerge as the strongest, if not the sole candidate for the position of ANC leader in 2007.

In the immediate aftermath of the court decision, demands will probably be made for Zuma’s reinstatement as deputy president of the country and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) may adopt a resolution to this effect at its congress.

Because President Thabo Mbeki is unlikely to meet such a demand, contradictions are destined to sharpen between the Zuma camp and the ruling party president. This will have the effect of giving impetus to the personalisation of the succession battle with the further effect of demonising Mbeki as the main source of Zuma’s troubles.

In such a poisoned climate, attempts may be made to either bring the ANC national conference forward or to call a special conference with the aim of ousting Mbeki as president of the party before the end of his term.

All of this suggests that Zuma’s is in a much stronger political position than he has been for a long time, which is in stark contrast to the crisis of isolation that has been deepening for Mbeki since the end of June last year when the rank and file rebelled against the leadership at the party’s national general council.

Aubrey Matshiqi is a senior associate and political analyst at the Centre for Policy Studies