Zuma dealt another blow in R28.9 million legal fees repayment case

FORMER President Jacob Zuma has failed in his latest bid to challenge the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria order that he has to pay back the R28.9 million bill for his private legal fees.

Judge Anthony Millar said that he was not persuaded that another court would come to a different conclusion.

“To keep the doors of the court open indefinitely to a litigant who refuses to accept the judgment on a particular matter, serves no legitimate purpose. All it does is serve to be a drain on scarce judicial resources and to strengthen the view that accountability can be deferred for so long as one has the means to do so,” the judge commented.

He added that it is destructive of the notion that all are equal before the law and confirmatory of the view that “there is far too much law for those who can afford it and far too little for those who cannot".

Judge Millar issued a range of orders in October ordering Zuma to pay back R28.9 million in respect of money advanced for his legal fees and associated expenses. 

Orders were also made for the payment of interest and for the State Attorney to report to the court on the steps taken to enforce the judgment. Zuma has applied for leave to appeal against the whole of the judgment and the orders granted, arguing that  neither the Full Court nor the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) previously explicitly ordered that he personally be responsible for the repayment of the costs expended on his behalf for his legal expenses.

But Judge Millar now said that the judgments of both courts in plain language make it clear that any order for repayment would have to be made against Zuma personally.

“There is simply no rational basis to conclude that because the orders of the Full Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal did not explicitly say ‘Mr. Zuma it is you who must pay back the money’, that that was not what was intended,” Judge Millar said.

The judge also rejected Zuma’s second objection, that the court “lacked the empathy and constitutional sensitivity” by ordering Zuma to make repayment. Judge Millar said in this regard the high-water mark of this argument was that the impact of the orders on Zuma were not taken into account.

He commented that what Zuma effectively now wants is for this court to overrule the earlier two judgments by the full court and the SCA that he must pay back the money, based on “empathy” and “constitutional sympathy".

“This is nothing more than an endeavour to re-litigate the matter and for this reason is also without merit. The issue that served before this court was not whether repayment was a just and equitable remedy but rather what was to be paid by Mr. Zuma once it had been ascertained,” Judge Millar said.

Regarding Zuma’s argument that this is a matter of public importance, Judge Millar remarked that the amount of money to be repaid is perhaps a matter of public interest; it is certainly not a matter of either public or legal importance.

Zuma can still turn to the SCA directly to apply for leave to appeal.

Cape Times