FUL argues ruling on Nxasana golden handshake correct

The lobby group is among several others applying to the apex court to have the full bench's findings made final.

FILE: Mxolisi Nxasana. Picture: EWN

PRETORIA - Freedom Under Law (FUL) has argued that the High Court was correct when it found former prosecutions boss Mxolisi Nxasana's golden handshake was unlawful and this order should be confirmed by the Constitutional Court.

The lobby group is among several others applying to the apex court to have the full bench's findings made final.

The High Court in Pretoria set aside Nxasana's settlement as well as the appointment of his successor Shaun Abrahams, who is appealing the order.

FUL has argued that Nxasana’s settlement was unconstitutional and unlawful, because he never requested to resign and his compensation was not prescribed in law.

The law allows for the national director to resign.

But they must request to do so and provide reasons before the president can accept those reasons.

Advocate Wim Trengove has told the court former president Jacob Zuma claims Nxasana asked to resign but this is not supported by any evidence.

Trengove says that Zuma first tried to bully Nxasana out of office by threatening him with an inquiry into his fitness to hold office, then paid him an obscene amount of money.

(Edited by Shimoney Regter)