News / Africa
Zuma in court for being a 'corrupt crook'
13 Jul 2014 at 06:19hrs | Views
South African President, Jacob Zuma, has reportedly gone to court over accusations that he is a "corrupt crook" and that his government is "extremely corrupt."
According to the Sunday Independent, this move is in response to businessperson Hugh Glenister's Constitutional Court appeal against parts of a Western Cape High Court judgment handed down in December ordering Glenister to pay former police minister Nathi Mthethwa's legal costs.
Glenister states the costs ordered against him is ill-considered and wants Mthethwa's strike-out application dismissed. Zuma also wants Glenister's case dismissed, saying the claims made against him are vexatious and defamatory.
According to Judge Siraj Desai's December judgment, Glenister's high court case illustrated the level of corruption in the country and targeted Zuma, Mthethwa, the SAPS and head of the Hawks, Lieutenant-General Anwa Dramat, as all being corrupt.
At the time, Desai ruled that sections of the act were "inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that they failed to secure an adequate degree of independence for the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation [the Hawks]".
He suspended the declaration of constitutional invalidity for a year for Parliament to rectify the defects.
The amendments to the act were drafted following a previous Constitutional Court victory by Glenister. The executive was ordered to change the legislation to, among other things, provide the Hawks with independence from political interference.
Glenister brought that suit following the dissolution of the Scorpions in 2008. The Scorpions fell under the jurisdiction of the National Prosecuting Authority.
In the Constitutional Court, Glenister and the HSF argued that the high court's ruling did not go far enough to secure the Hawks sufficient institutional and operational independence. They are concerned about the possibility that the minister of police could exercise undue political interference through policing policy guidelines in the operations of the Hawks.
There were also concerns about security of tenure, dismissal procedures, and appointment criteria.
According to the Sunday Independent, this move is in response to businessperson Hugh Glenister's Constitutional Court appeal against parts of a Western Cape High Court judgment handed down in December ordering Glenister to pay former police minister Nathi Mthethwa's legal costs.
Glenister states the costs ordered against him is ill-considered and wants Mthethwa's strike-out application dismissed. Zuma also wants Glenister's case dismissed, saying the claims made against him are vexatious and defamatory.
According to Judge Siraj Desai's December judgment, Glenister's high court case illustrated the level of corruption in the country and targeted Zuma, Mthethwa, the SAPS and head of the Hawks, Lieutenant-General Anwa Dramat, as all being corrupt.
At the time, Desai ruled that sections of the act were "inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid to the extent that they failed to secure an adequate degree of independence for the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation [the Hawks]".
He suspended the declaration of constitutional invalidity for a year for Parliament to rectify the defects.
The amendments to the act were drafted following a previous Constitutional Court victory by Glenister. The executive was ordered to change the legislation to, among other things, provide the Hawks with independence from political interference.
Glenister brought that suit following the dissolution of the Scorpions in 2008. The Scorpions fell under the jurisdiction of the National Prosecuting Authority.
In the Constitutional Court, Glenister and the HSF argued that the high court's ruling did not go far enough to secure the Hawks sufficient institutional and operational independence. They are concerned about the possibility that the minister of police could exercise undue political interference through policing policy guidelines in the operations of the Hawks.
There were also concerns about security of tenure, dismissal procedures, and appointment criteria.
Source - Sunday Independent, News24
