Ramaphosa vs Zuma: Here is what happened in court yesterday

A heated argument broke out as Adv Dali Mpofu accused the NPA of acting in a “disgraceful” manner in the Ramaphosa vs Zuma case.

The Zuma versus Ramaphosa matter sat before a full bench of judges Selby Baqwa, Lebogang Modiba and Mohammed Ismail at the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg on Wednesday and continued today.

ALSO READ: Ramaphosa more of a ‘country-club manager’ than a president, says De Ruyter

ADV DALI MPOFU TOLD TO “TONE DOWN” IN COURT

Proceedings in the matter between President Cyril Ramaphosa and former president Jacob Zuma became heated after Zuma’s lawyer, advocate Dali Mpofu, accused the National Prosecuting Authority of acting in a “disgraceful” manner by issuing a statement of support and defending state advocate Billy Downer.

Mpofu unleashed an attack on the NPA and KZN Director of Public Prosecutions Elaine Zungu who stated that she never considered whether to pursue a criminal case against Ramaphosa when she granted the disputed nolle prosequi certificates.

READ MORE: ‘We are not the only country facing a power crisis’- Ramaphosa

ZUMA VS RAMAPHOSA MATTER

Zuma has accused Ramaphosa of not acting on a complaint he lodged against Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan last year and therefore sought private prosecution against the president on charges of being an accessory after the fact, relating to crimes in that case.

Yesterday, Mpofu labelled Zungu a liar. Judge Modiba told Mpofu to “tone down” his language.

Those sitting in the public gallery who were clapping in support of Mpofu’s arguments were also warned by the judges that they would be removed from the court if they did not maintain court decorum.

ALSO READ: Case against ANC councillor charged with rape postponed for bail application

Mpofu told the court there was nothing unreasonable about Zuma issuing a criminal summons against Ramaphosa on the eve of the ANC’s elective conference in December as Zuma was only trying to get matters finalised before the year end.

Mpofu has maintained that Ramaphosa was always a suspect in the case.

He also argued that Ramaphosa brought this matter to the incorrect court and that he acted “prematurely” as he had not yet pleaded to his criminal charges.

ALSO READ: LIST: Top South African banks with most complaints in 2023

MPOFU AND AND RAMAPHOSA’S REPRESENTATIVE ARGUMENTS

Mpofu argued that no matter his position, even if the president faced criminal charges, he should first be brought to the criminal court to plead before approaching a civil court to determine the right to prosecute.

ALSO READ: Irregular expenditure and poor management taking its toll on SANDF’s budget

Earlier in the day, state attorney representing Ramaphosa, advocate Ngwako Maenjte SC, said this case fell squarely in the boundaries of abuse of court process, ulterior motives and no substantial interests.

“It’s frivolous and vexatious.This is the kind of criminal charge that is proffered against the president. With great respect, the courts are not there to be used for this sorts of cases whether to settle political scores or to deal with personal animosity,” Maentje said.

ALSO READ: Former pastor says Bishop Zondo raped his wife several times