A ”final briefing” on whether African National Congress (ANC) deputy president Jacob Zuma would have to face new corruption charges would be given to the acting National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) on Thursday.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) said in a statement that the prosecution team was due to brief Mokotedi Mpshe on the case.
”The prosecution team will today [Thursday] present a final briefing to the acting NDPP, and he will announce his decision on the matter after careful consideration of information presented,” the NPA statement said.
”The process is a very protracted one and involves the assessment of all the work completed so far.”
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) dismissed an appeal by Zuma to stop the state from getting documents being held in Mauritius.
In another ruling, the SCA upheld an appeal by the NDPP against a high-court order setting aside five search warrants against Zuma and his Durban-based lawyer Michael Hulley.
The judgements relate to a long investigation into corruption in South Africa’s multibillion-rand arms deal.
Zuma’s financial adviser and confidant Schabir Shaik has already been sentenced for corruption and fraud in the same investigation.
On Thursday, Mpshe would also receive a report from a review panel on whether to charge police National Commissioner Jackie Selebi.
The panel reviewed the apparent decision of suspended prosecutions chief Vusi Pikoli to arrest Selebi for alleged criminal activities.
”The acting NDPP will study the report and the NPA will make known its decision as soon as it is ready to do so,” the NPA said.
The panel was made up of Frank Dutton, advocate Mbuyiseli Madlanga, Peter Goss and advocate Shamila Batohi.
The formation of the panel was preceded by President Thabo Mbeki’s suspension of Pikoli, citing a breakdown in the working relationship between him and Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Brigitte Mabandla.
This came after Pikoli obtained an arrest warrant for Selebi.
‘Judicial process’ divided
Meanwhile, Zuma and Hulley are claiming in papers filed with the Constitutional Court on Wednesday that search-and-seizure raids by the Scorpions invaded their constitutional right to privacy, and dignity.
In the papers filed with the court, Hulley claims that the raids are so controversial that although SCA ruled in the state’s favour, the ”judicial process” was equally divided over the raids.
He said: ”The court of first instance [the Durban High Court] and the two judges in the SCA found for the applicants herein; three judges of the SCA found for the respondents.
”The outcome in the SCA has simply demonstrated that the issues are contentious and of principle. It is thus clear also that there are reasonable prospects of success on appeal.”
He goes on further to say: ”This of course is of fundamental importance in controlling the extent of the invasion into the constitutional rights of particularly privacy, dignity and property inherent in search and seizure operations.”
Hulley said the search-and-seizure warrants gave permission for documents related to the investigations into Zuma to be seized, but that the problem was the warrants never ”remotely described” the investigation.
Such a vagueness in the warrants ”thus allowed on the face of it, a general ransacking of the premises targeted”.
Zuma and Hulley’s premises were raided by the Scorpions on August 18 2005. – Sapa