CASAC says Zuma vs IEC case has implications on law and separation of powers
The lobby group was admitted as a friend of the court in the IEC’s bid to challenge Zuma’s candidacy in the May 29 polls.
FILE: Former President Jacob Zuma. Picture: Xanderleigh Dookey Makhaza/Eyewitness News
JOHANNESBURG - The Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC) said that it is important to test if the decision to allow Jacob Zuma to run for a seat as a Member of Parliament (MP) can withstand Constitutional scrutiny.
This comes after the lobby group was admitted as a friend of the court in the Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC)’s bid to challenge Zuma’s candidacy in the May 29 polls.
The IEC wants the Constitutional Court to make the final call on the matter.
In April, the Electoral Court upheld an appeal to the IEC’s decision to preclude Zuma from standing as a candidate for the MK party at the elections.
The Electoral Court’s decision means that Zuma is not disqualified by Section 47 (1)(e) of the Constitution from seeking election to the National Assembly.
Under the section, the Constitution disqualifies from the National Assembly, anyone convicted of an offence and sentenced to more than 12 months in prison without the option of a fine.
The dispute over Zuma’s eligibility to run for public office stems from the June 2021 decision to convict him of contempt of court.
He was handed a 15-month sentence but only served a fraction of the jail time after President Cyril Ramaphosa granted him special remission.
CASAC said that the Electoral Court misconceived the nature and legal effect of the remission, adding that remission does not undo the sentence and does not overcome a disqualification from seeking election.
The council said that the Electoral Court’s decision to allow Zuma to run for a seat in the National Assembly has implications for the rule of law and the separation of powers.
ALSO READ: