JZF disappointed but not surprised by ConCourt ruling on Zuma rescission bid

The Jacob Zuma Foundation insisted that there had been a miscarriage of justice and that the former president was being bullied through the law.

FILE: Former President Jacob Zuma at the state capture inquiry in Johannesburg on 17 November 2020. Picture: Abigail Javier/Eyewitness News.

JOHANNESBURG - The Jacob Zuma Foundation said that it was disappointed but not surprised that the Constitutional Court had dismissed the former president’s application for a rescission of his 15-month jail sentence for contempt.

Zuma’s application failed to meet the statutory requirements of rescission, with the majority of judges ruling that he could not show how the previous judgment was erroneous.

[Judgment] CCT 52-21 JG Zuma v Secretary of the Judicial Commission of I... by Primedia Broadcasting on Scribd

The former president was sentenced by the apex court for contempt after he refused to abide by its order to return to the state capture commission of inquiry.

He filed the rescission application just hours before he was due to be arrested.

- Zuma failed to show why contempt order was granted in error - ConCourt
- Edward Zuma: The judiciary has never been impartial when it comes to Jacob Zuma

But his foundation insisted that there had been a miscarriage of justice and that the former president was being bullied through the law.

The Jacob Zuma Foundation said that the Constitutional Court had once again disregarded the former leader’s rights, citing not only the judgment but also the long wait for it to be handed down as an issue.

Spokesperson Mzwanele Manyi said that it had been a long three-month wait.

"We hold the view that justice delayed is justice denied. the fact that it took so long, that in itself is a miscarriage of justice."

While Manyi once again sided with the minority judgment, he said that the majority only served to bully the former president, arguing that the Constitutional Court's decision should be declared invalid as there was a split in the judgment.

Manyi also took another swipe at Justice Sisi Khampepe’s use of language, calling it angry and emotional.

"In the past, they used words like 'repulsed' and now they've got 'skullduggery' - it just shows the amount of anger and emotion in that court."

The case is moot as Zuma has already served his time and has been granted medical parole.

WATCH: 'Litigious skullduggery': Zuma’s bid for rescission dismissed with costs

Download the Eyewitness News app to your iOS or Android device.