Zuma vs Ramaphosa

2023 - 1 - 13

WRAP | Ramaphosa vs Zuma: Court to deliver judgment on ... (News24)

Jacob Zuma is privately prosecuting president Cyril Ramaphosa for alleged breaches of the NPA Act.

He insists that a public official can be criminally charged for "not doing his job" - in this case, "not doing his job", according to Zuma, concerns Ramaphosa's alleged criminal failure to take action against Zuma's prosecutor Billy Downer. Mpofu argues that any person accused of crime must suffer the inconvenience of being forced to appear at court. The party's stance on this may be crucial in this matter and, potentially, many others. Mpofu says Ramaphosa's freedom will only be curtailed for 30 minutes, should be required to appear on the Zuma summons. Again, he tries to conflate Zuma's private prosecution with a state prosecution. He says Ramaphosa is mentioned in Zuma's affidavit when he laid the charge against Downer. He says that, if this was the case, Ramaphosa would have taken legal action far sooner than he did. He says he didn't even go into the "arrogance" of Ramaphosa bringing this application. He also said last year: "The sad part was that I was arrested for no reason at all. This has not happened in this matter, he says. Manetje denies that there is any public interest at play in Zuma's private prosecution of Ramaphosa. He denies any suggestion that the President dragged his feet in taking this matter to court.

Judgement reserved in Ramaphosa vs Zuma private prosecution ... (Eyewitness News)

Legal teams representing Ramaphosa and his predecessor appeared before a full bench of the Joburg High Court on Thursday afternoon.

Legal teams representing Ramaphosa and his predecessor appeared before a full bench of the Joburg High Court on Thursday afternoon. "If there are avenues to deal with this process at a later stage, what warrants the jumping of the queue, the dealing with this matter on an urgent basis, just because you are the President, that's what the court is going to say and say this matter is not urgent, go to court on the 19th and be able to ventilate your matters then." Meanwhile, weighing in on the court proceedings, legal analyst Mpumelelo Zikalala says prospects of success are slim for the President.

Court dismisses little known foundation application in the ... (SowetanLIVE)

Advocate Dali Mpofu, appearing on behalf of former president Jacob Zuma, arrives at the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg. Image: Antonio Muchave.

WATCH | Ramaphosa, Zuma in legal showdown (eNCA)

President Cyril Ramaphosa is seeking an order to interdict former President Jacob Zuma from privately prosecuting him.

Ramaphosa v Zuma: Court to deliver judgment on Monday (Johannesburg Sunday World)

The high court in Johannesburg has concluded to deliver its judgment in the civil matter involving President Cyril Ramaphosa and his.

However, the court asserted that it saw no relevance for the foundation to take part in the showdown. It amounts to these 4 000 pages [Ramaphosa’s court papers] to try and do what?” Mpofu asked the court. To Subscribe to Sunday World, [click here.](https://subs.arena.africa/#!/offer/411?utm_source=promo411&utm_medium=Circ) There is jurisdiction, this court can grant relief.” All these other gymnastics, forget about them.” Maenetje argued: “This prosecution is prima-facie unlawful.

Ramaphosa vs Zuma: 'If it's a cooked court outcome, we'll not accept ... (Citizen)

Mzwanele Manyi says they will only accept the outcome of the urgent interdict application brought Cyril Ramaphosa only if it is lawful.

I sincerely hope these judges are not going to prove themselves to be captured,” Niehaus said. “That alone should be an anomaly. [Carl Niehaus](https://twitter.com/niehaus_carl), said he did not want to predict the outcome of the case, however, he was in court with an open mind to hear what the court was going to do. “If it is a cooked outcome, we will not accept it. You as media should be asking how is it possible that a civil court can overturn something that is in the timetable of a criminal court.” The president approached the high court on an urgent basis after Zuma – on the eve of the ANC’s 55th elective conference in December – charged him with being an “accessory after the fact” in relation to charges the former president is pursuing against senior state prosecutor

Judgment reserved in Ramaphosa's attempt to interdict Zuma's ... (Daily Maverick)

Arguing in court on Thursday on an interim interdict, President Cyril Ramaphosa's lawyers said Jacob Zuma's private prosecution attempt trampled on his ...

“The President is not the authority to investigate crime. Zuma is privately prosecuting Downer and Maughan for allegedly colluding to “leak” his private medical information, submitted as part of other documentation in the Arms Deal case, and contends Ramaphosa failed to act when he was told about such. The President responded on 25 August 2021 that the matter, “[which] we view in a very serious light”, had been referred to Justice and Correctional Services Minister Ronald Lamola. Maenetje reiterated that the position of a private prosecution was different to a public one. Maenetje told the court that Zuma had indicated no intention that he was willing to postpone the 19 January criminal court appearance. Zuma is expecting Ramaphosa to appear in court next week and enter a plea. Instead, Zuma was relying on certificates issued in relation to Downer and Maughan. Zuma initiated the private prosecution of Ramaphosa on 15 December, the day before the governing party was to start its national elective conference, the conclusion of which saw Ramaphosa being voted in for a second term as ANC president. Any issues Ramaphosa had relating to the private prosecution could be aired in a criminal court, he said. Referring to cases quoted by Mpofu, he said those were all prosecutions brought by the State, not individuals. Ramaphosa’s rights would be “trampled on” if he was to appear, said Maenetje. Zuma’s team accused the President of ‘arrogance’ and maintained he had been charged and must appear in court.