Constitutional provision prohibiting a convict from running in polls must apply to Zuma too - Ahmed Kathrada Foundation
In a written submission filed with the apex court on Wednesday, the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation said it believes the Electoral Court erred in its interpretation of the Constitution when it ruled on Zuma's eligibility to contest this month’s elections.
Former President Jacob Zuma at the Shekainah Healing Ministries Prophetic Pillowcase service in Phillipi, near Cape Town, on March 10, 2024. Picture: GIANLUIGI GUERCIA / AFP
CAPE TOWN - The Ahmed Kathrada Foundation said that a constitutional provision prohibiting a convicted person from running in elections must apply to former President Jacob Zuma too.
The foundation has been admitted as the third "friend of the court" in a Constitutional Court application in which the Electoral Commission is challenging last month’s decision of the Electoral Court giving Zuma the go-ahead to run for public office.
In a written submission filed with the apex court on Wednesday, the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation said it believes the Electoral Court erred in its interpretation of the Constitution when it ruled on Zuma's eligibility to contest this month’s elections.
ALSO READ: CASAC reiterates stance that Electoral Court erred in Zuma candidacy admission
The foundation said it does not believe that Section 47 of the Constitution does not apply to Zuma's 15-month prison sentence because it was imposed by the country’s highest court and therefore not appealable.
The foundation has been admitted as amicus curiae along with CASAC and Corruption Watch.
It said it endorsed the latter's submissions that anyone convicted of an offence and sentenced to more than 12 months imprisonment without the option of a fine cannot become an MP.
The foundation said that because Zuma could not appeal his 2021 sentence for contempt of court, it does not mean Section 47(1)(e) of the Constitution does not apply to him.
It goes on to argue if a sentence imposed by the Constitutional Court is not covered by this section, as is the reasoning of the Electoral Court, such sentences are then being treated as of lesser concern than ones handed down by lower courts.
If anything, the foundation said that a sentence handed down by the Constitutional Court provided greater reason for the section to apply.
The Ahmed Kathrada Foundation said that the meaning of a criminal sentence in Section 47 does not depend on whether the sentence may be appealed or not.