MK ZUMA VS ANC ELECTION 2024 (PART 2)

THE countdown to the 29th of May 2024 historic election in South Africa continues as the newly-formed six-months-old uMkhonto weSizwe Political Party (Spear of the Nation) MK launched its manifesto filling the 37 000-seater Orlando Stadium which has a great significance to the struggle of the black people for freedom.

President Zuma’s Nine lives
The 82-year-old former President, Jacob Zuma’s long and controversial political career reached one of many picks this past weekend with the official launch of MK. Zuma, who joined the ANC as a teenager, was jailed on Robben Island for a decade under the apartheid regime. He went on to head the ANC’s intelligence wing in exile, and after the end of apartheid, quickly rose through the African National Congress (ANC) Political Party’s ranks. He led the ANC for years and was the South African president for almost two teams.

He is now going up against his former political party under the banner of the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party in the country’s most closely contested election since the first democratic vote 30 years ago. Since 2005, Zuma has been hit with a barrage, of legal challenges, court trials, and political scandals that might have sunk many ordinary politicians. No politician in the country has presented a test of powers on the separation of state powers like him, proving that the conduct of political power is limited by the rule of law. However, he has bounced back each time, his ‘grassroots’ approach helping him keep a loyal follower base intact.

State capture saga would take centre stage in his second team.  Zuma’s close relationship with the powerful Gupta brothers – Ajay, Atul and Rajesh – had been under scrutiny for years. The family had close relations with President Mandela and President Mbeki, however, all things changed against President Zuma. The Gupta family only controlled four percent of the Eskom supply, which was their strongest case for capturing the State. The rest was supplied by white monopoly capitalist companies and black associates.

One billion would be spent on the Judge Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo-led Sate Capture commission. More than seven hundred charges of corruption were given against Zuma. However, could not find even one strong enough to persecute. The commission would go on for years, and Zuma attended until he decided that it was futile to continue attending as he believed that the commission was politically motivated and set up to persecute him and not for real state capture. This would annoy Judge Zondo to no end, forcing him to take matters to the highest level.

Historic Constitutional Court judgement
The commission’s legal team led by Judge Zondo had come up with a strategy that, they felt outwitted Zuma. They felt Zuma benefitted from the strength of South Africa’s rule of law with his so-called “Stalingrad strategy” – taking every legal point and appealing every judgment against him. Instead of going to a lower court, as customary in contempt of court proceedings, the Zondo Commission went directly to the Constitutional Court. Judge Zondo influenced the Constitutional Court to accept jurisdiction on the basis that it was its order that he was defying and because of the exceptional and urgent circumstances.

Zondo also argued that the public had an interest in having Zuma give evidence at the commission and respond to the grave allegations of corruption that have been made against him during his nine years in office. This took away Zuma’s rights of appeal which is part of the Bill of Rights within the constitution they protect. The consequence was that Zuma, had nowhere to appeal, as it is the apex court. South Africa’s Constitutional Court thus found former president Jacob Zuma guilty of contempt of court and sentenced him to 15 months imprisonment without the option of a fine. This according to many legal experts was a very hush sentence for an 80-year-old Zuma and his crime. Unfortunately, this 2021 judgment would come back to haunt them as violent unrest erupted costing the country jobs, more than R30 billion, and forcing President Ramaphosa to issue a remission of sentence to Zuma and 9 000 inmates on the face-saving ground of overcrowded jails.

MK infringement on ANC trademark case
Fast forward to 2024, The African National Congress took the uMkhonto Wesizwe Party (MKP)to court seeking an interdict claiming the MKP infringed its trademark which they claimed was likely to cause confusion or deception in the mind of the average South African voter. In addition, the ANC contends that the MKP has, through the use of the name uMkhonto weSizwe and its logo synonymous with the history of the ANC, infringed on their history. Unfortunately, the ANC lost two times against the MKP on this matter.

Umkhonto weSizwe Political Party vs Electoral Commission  
The Electoral Commission is then taken to the Electoral Court by Zuma and MKP for upholding two of  22 objections to have Zuma barred from being a candidate as he has a criminal record.  On Friday, April 26, 2024, the Electoral Court published its heavily anticipated judgment, outlining the reasons for its decision in favor of former President Jacob Zuma.  
The judges argued that the Presidential remission of Zuma’s sentence effectively reduced it to three months, which would not disqualify him from National Assembly membership.
The judgment discusses the importance of the appeal process in determining the disqualification of individuals under Section 47(1)(e) of the Constitution. It argues that until the appeal process is concluded, the individual is not regarded as having been sentenced. In this particular unique case, Zuma had no opportunity for any appearance which was his constitutional right, and never stood in front of any judge to answer for himself.  

Electoral Commission appeals to Constitutional Court
Following the Electoral Commission ruling, which was overturned on appeal, the ‘Independent’ Electoral Commission (IEC) took the case on appeal to the Constitutional Court even before receiving the full judgment. It claimed that it needed constitutional clarity to ensure that the elections were free and fair. The approach effectively brought Zuma again face to face with the same Constitutional Court judges who were his jailers. Zuma’s lawyers asked for them to recluse themselves sighting clear obvious bias, but they refused. As things stand their judgment is still pending. Should they rule in favour of the IEC then Zuma cannot go to Parliament or become president. This is no longer a train smash because the ballot papers already have his picture and that can no longer change.  Let us all wait and see May 29 election result.  Comment septembereswatini@gmail.com

.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: