Zuma is the victim, says lawyer as State wants R28m paid back

LAWYERS representing ex-president Jacob Zuma believe state officials who unlawfully granted him the money for his legal fees should be held accountable.

The Presidency and State Attorney seek to recover more than R28 million spent on Zuma’s legal fees.

However Advocate Thabani Masuku for Zuma told the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, that his client was not granted the money through corruption, but that  the legal fees were paid from the State coffers following wrong legal advice to the state.

He said while Zuma did benefit from the money, it was not his doing that it was given to him. Those officials who allowed the State to pay for his legal fees up until the court in 2019 put an end to this, should be held liable to pay the money back as it was irregular expenditure, Masuku told Judge Anthony Millar.

Masuku did not dispute the legal bill standing at R28 million, but he maintained that Zuma is the victim in all of this as he is not the one who acted unconstitutionally.

“He is now being confronted with paying back R28 million, but the State placed him in this position. It is not his fault,” he argued.

Masuku remarked that it is very odd that the actual perpetrators - the State - are cleared, while Zuma must face the music. 

He added that Zuma stands to lose his home and his pension if he is ordered to pay the money back, while this is all the State’s fault.

Advocate George Avvakoumides, acting on behalf of the Presidency and the State Attorney, argued that two courts - the Gauteng High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal in earlier judgments, made it clear that the State money spent on his private legal fees must be paid back.

The SCA at the time ordered the State Attorney’s office to calculate the amount owed and to take steps to recover the money. This has now been done, and the amount has been calculated. Thus, the advocate argued, there cannot be any defence as to why he should not pay the money back.

Avvakoumides said Zuma used these funds to litigate on a luxurious scale. He told the court that they are not unsympathetic towards Zuma, as he was advised that he was entitled to public funding, which he received until it was stopped. But, he said, Zuma benefitted, and the rule of law must prevail.

While the Presidency did not ask for interest to be calculated on the R28 million, the DA, who is also an applicant in this application, insisted on this. 

Advocate Sean Rosenberg, acting for the DA, also argued that if the court ordered him to repay this amount and he cannot, the court should order that his pension should be attached to ensure payment of the debt.

This prompted Judge Millar to question how Zuma was going to live if his pension was taken. “Mr Zuma is in his 80s… Is it appropriate for the court to make such an order?” the judge questioned.

The judge further pointed out that Zuma has to provide for his spouses and he has other financial obligations.

“We must be mindful that everyone is entitled to live and not to be driven to impoverishment,” the judge said.

Judgment was reserved.

Cape Times