The Jacob Zuma Basis on Monday accused relate purchase inquiry chairperson deputy chief justice Raymond Zondo of abusing his situation to bend the foundations to behold the old president jailed.
Zuma has beforehand acknowledged he didn’t be troubled imprisonment however the foundation acknowledged in a observation on Monday that the commission become firm to search out him responsible by “hook or felony”.
This follows Zuma’s defiance of a Constitutional Court ruling compelling him to appear sooner than the commission. Zondo, in response, known as on the apex court to impose a two-year jail term on the old president.
Explaining the reason on the reduction of the name, Zondo acknowledged this become to send a solid message and be obvious no-one copied Zuma’s antics.
“The commission will originate an application to the Constitutional Court and look an snort that Mr Zuma is responsible of contempt of court, and if the Constitutional Court reaches that conclusion then it is miles in its discretion what to achieve,” acknowledged Zondo.
The foundation lambasted the switch, calling it determined and inconsistent with the commission’s guidelines.
“This desperation of the deputy chief justice, abusing his situation because the 2d responsible within the Constitutional Court, instructing his subordinates to bend the regulations of this nation, is unparalleled. He ignores direction of and jurisdiction as prescribed in law, upright to make particular the Zuma relate purchase commission of inquiry finds president Zuma responsible by hook or felony to boom him to a pair hidden masters.
“The 1947 [Commissions] Act talks about six months’ imprisonment or 55 kilos horny, no longer the 2 years’ imprisonment that the honourable procure, who is chairing the commission on my own, suggests,” acknowledged the foundation.
It compared Zuma’s troubles with those of anti-apartheid struggle icon Robert Sobukwe.
“The master has directed, it is miles sure the regulations are being modified to tackle president Zuma, love how the apartheid authorities created Sobukwe regulations to tackle Sobukwe. Certainly, it sounds love an frail apartheid regime within the hands of the shaded leaders within the democratic South Africa.”
The foundation moreover slammed the commission for rejecting “cheap” proposals Zuma had made sooner than his defiance of the apex court’s ruling.
“The Jacob G Zuma Basis has worthy that in paragraph 81 of its affidavit, the commission surreptitiously asks for an snort that become openly offered by president Zuma’s appropriate counsel and rejected by the commission.
“While looking out for to appear to dangle up its exhausting unreasonable stance, the commission pretends this is its genuine solve, when everyone is conscious of it is miles an offer they rejected, as they did with the total responsible proposals.
“We uncover this insincerity demanding at this level and never befitting a appropriate direction of of this magnitude.
“As soon as extra, we remind the commission that it rejected this offer. We hope in its selective presentation of details to the Constitutional Court, it’ll be heroic ample to admit this reality.”