Research conducted by the Democratic Alliance has found that since 2009 the Zumster has spent an inordinate amount of taxpayers’ money on keeping himself from facing justice. This is despite there being no basic services for the millions of South Africans who so deserve them.
Specifically, President Zuma has spent almost R10 million on:
Nov 2013 – present
Advocate’s fees R4,795 000
Attorney’s fees R400,000
Correspondent fees R 300,000
Admin fees R4,000
Cost orders R1,200,000
Start – Nov 2013
According to parliamentary written reply R 2,337 569
Total R 9,036,569
The Chairperson of the DA’s Federal Executive, James Selfe, was at a press conference in Nelson Mandela Bay joined by the DA’s Federal Chairperson and Mayoral Candidate for Nelson Mandela Bay, Athol Trollip when he said this frivolous expenditure by the president is set to rise since the President and his cronies at the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) are now taking his matter to the Constitutional Court.
Self said this is indicative of how much the ANC State has become preoccupied with protecting President Zuma and that alone. “Throughout my time in Parliament I have watched the ANC become a shadow of itself and a shadow of what it was supposed to be. The truth is that the ANC has changed and done so for the worse. The truth is that the ANC has done so for President Zuma who faces 783 legal charges… This is also true of the Cabinet and the Ministers he has appointed to do his bidding.”
He said this investigation vindicates the DA’s long-held position that the decision to drop the charges against Zuma was indeed distinctly irrational and that it was not based in any cogent logic or law.
The truth is, despite what Jacob Zuma says, the record of decision reveals that:
– The then acting National Director of Prosecutions (NDPP) Mikotedit Mpshe did not make his decision based on an assessment that his earlier decision to institute criminal proceedings against the President was flawed and;
– He did not make his decision based on any new information; and
– He did not make his decision based on any substantive content of the indictment containing the charges or on concerns about the prosecuting team.
In the absence of any legitimate factual or legal reasons, the DA is led to believe that these charges were dropped to serve a political agenda. It would have been for President Zuma to argue that he was being prosecuted for malicious political reasons and for a competent court to decide on the merits of such representations. It was not for the NPA, acting at the President’s behest, to simply drop the charges without legal basis.
