Professional Documents
Culture Documents
when I say that South Africa today is in the process of changing from a constitutional
Court on 17 September 2021, I am more than certain of this than ever before. Many
of our people are blind to this reality at this point because they have been successfully
befitting for others that the laws of this country be repeatedly bent and manipulated
when dealing with Zuma. To illustrate this point in the current context I shall only cite
Firstly, the Commission of Inquiry Into Allegations of State Capture was born out of an
that a commission of inquiry be set up to continue an investigation that she had started
as her term of office was coming to an end. This was an anomaly because the Public
Protector was supposed to hand over the investigation to her successor as she did
with all the other investigations of her office that were not completed when her term of
office ended. However, given that this was a case that had something to do with Zuma,
a different process was followed to set up a commission of inquiry to the extent that
for the first time, the presidential prerogative and powers to appoint a commission of
inquiry were unilaterally usurped by Public Protector and handed to the Chief Justice.
Interestingly, the reason given at the time was that I would not appoint an independent
judge, lending credence to the idea that there are some judges who are not
independent. This posture by the Public Protector was not perceived as an attack on
the integrity of our judges and was instead accepted as plausible by the Judge
President of Gauteng Division of the High Court. As President at the time, I challenged
this as something unconstitutional. Judge Mlambo presided over this matter and in his
judgement but when President Ramaphosa took over as president, he abandoned that
appeal before it had been heard by the Supreme Court of Appeal. This appeal was
Secondly, the commission chaired by judge Zondo was set up in terms of the
Commissions Act of 1947. This Act is clear on what the law is in cases of contempt of
commissions. At the time I did not oppose that application because I had a genuine
belief that the judges of the Constitutional Court would not grant direct access over an
issue like contempt of a commission of inquiry. I trusted that in keeping with all their
previous decisions, the Constitutional Court would show deference to the principle of
subsidiarity and allow the lower courts their rightful place to deal with the issue of my
attendance at the commission as at that point there was no constitutional issue that
would invoke the direct involvement of the Constitutional Court. Legally and as again
stated by the dissenting judgment, the Commissions Act is the primary legislation that
had to be followed as it had been followed when PW Botha refused to appear before
the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The Constitutional Court in this case
somehow found it fitting to deviate from its own rules and it was again another case of
the laws and the Constitution being bent and manipulated to specifically deal with
Zuma. I would have welcomed an opportunity to lead evidence before an independent
judge why I felt judge Zondo was biased and conflicted in hearing my evidence at the
commission.
Thirdly, once the whole contempt debacle had run its full course with judge Zondo’s
subordinates presiding over a matter that had directly called into question his integrity
as a judge, the Constitutional Court again made decisions and took actions that have
never been taken in our law by asking that I do a mitigation of sentence where there
had been no conviction. I feel vindicated in that it still remains the contention of the
minority judges that everything that has happened since then has been
Constitutional Court that the dissenting judges go as far as accusing their colleagues
of acting unconstitutionally.
Most astounding of all though, is how the Constitutional Court has for the first time
ever stated that it does not have to consider international law as directed by Section
39(1)(b) of the Constitution. It is a very sad day in our history to observe how those
we have entrusted with the Constitution now consider themselves above the
Constitution. I have been rebuked for my public comments about the conduct of certain
publicly critique judges the same way they have a right to critique me as a politician.
Freedom of expression is a fundamental right in our Bill of Rights and for that to be
me and continue to support me in the struggle to help liberate the black African person
and South Africans. I would also like to thank my legal team as led by Advocate Mpofu
SC and Advocate Masuku SC for their bravery and resolve against the most difficult
legal obstacles at all times. It is important to bear in mind that fighting these cases
against me is part of the struggle to bring justice, dignity and respect for the black
African. My life has come full circle in taking me from being a herd boy, worker, trade
weSizwe under the African National Congress. I became a political prisoner for 10
years under the apartheid regime which did not care about my rights. I understood the
apartheid regime’s attitude because they were indeed my oppressors. Now, I have
been a prisoner without a trial, in a South Africa that is said to be free and respecting
the rights of its citizens, where I never thought this would occur on me or anyone else.
I wear the badge of being a political prisoner with the greatest pride as the struggle for
the freedom of the African against all forms of oppression, including oppression of the
African by other collaborator Africans, has been my sole mission in life. I urge all those
who support me to remain resolute and steadfast in the belief that this is not the end.
I shall fight on. Justice shall prevail. Injustice will be defeated. We will attain true