|
Zuma pinning hopes on Concourt
10/03/2008 21:13 - (SA)
Johannesburg - African National Congress president Jacob Zuma is due to take his seat in the Constitutional Court on Tuesday in a last-ditch bid to prevent key documents from being used against him.
His legal team will argue that his constitutional rights were violated when the Scorpions raided his home as well as that of his attorney in 2005.
Zuma's attorney confirmed on Monday that his client would be attending the proceedings while Johannesburg metro police announced that they would have several extra officers deployed in Braamfontein to ensure that traffic will keep flowing irrespective of the number of Zuma supporters who may turn out.
Both Zuma and Hulley are claiming that their constitutional right to privacy, dignity, property and a fair trial were violated by the raids.
Wants respondents to pay costs
Papers already before the court and signed by advocates Kemp J Kemp and Mike Smithers are part of the Concourt action that challenges a Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ruling made on November 8.
The SCA then ruled that five warrants used to search the premises of Zuma and Hulley, were legal - a fact disputed by the two.
Zuma and Hulley argue that they "should be granted leave to appeal to this court against the majority judgment of the SCA and that the respondents be ordered to pay the costs occasioned by their opposition to this application."
The controversial raids at properties belonging to Zuma in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal and at Hulley's Durban office were carried out on August 18 2005.
They came two months after Judge Hilary Squires convicted Zuma's former confidante and financial adviser Schabir Shaik in Durban High Court on two counts of corruption and one count of fraud.
The corruption charges related to Shaik's attempt to solicit a R500 000-a-year bribe for Zuma from French arms manufacturing giant Thales International (formerly Thomson CSF).
Durban High Court declared the five search warrants invalid and the searches pursuant to them unlawful. However, the SCA in November overturned the High Court ruling.
Appeal Court was not united
It was also argued that Zuma and Hulley had reasonable grounds for success on appeal - a fact Hulley highlighted in his affidavit filed with the Concourt on November 29 last year.
At the time, Hulley pointed to the fact that the SCA was not united in its decision to rule in the National Prosecuting Authority's favour.
He said then: "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."
In a second written argument filed with the Concourt, Zuma claimed that his constitutional rights had been violated by Judge Philip Levensohn's decision last April to grant the NPA a letter of request asking authorities in Mauritius to hand over documents pertaining to alleged meetings between Zuma, Schabir Shaik and Thint.
The documents that the State seeks from Mauritius include the 2000 diary of Alain Thetard, the former chief executive of Thales International's South African subsidiary, Thint, which reportedly details a meeting in March 2000 between him, Zuma and Shaik.
40 extra cops on duty
The NPA alleges that an agreement on a R500 000-a-year bribe for Zuma was reached at this meeting.
Zuma's appeal against Levensohn's decision to issue the letter of request was rejected by the SCA.
Inspector Edna Mamonyane of the metro police said on Monday that 40 officers would be deployed in and around the Constitutional Court to ensure that traffic kept flowing.
She said she was not aware that there would be any protests or how many supporters would arrive at the Constitutional Court to show their support for Zuma.
|
News
