The lawyers, representing South Africa’s President, Cyril Ramaphosa in his challenge of the private prosecution against him by former leader Jacob Zuma, have argued that his office will suffer undue interference should he be hauled before a criminal court.
Ramaphosa is asking the full bench in the Johannesburg High Court to declare the summons issued by Zuma as unlawful, unconstitutional and invalid.
He wants the court to review and set aside the summons and also declare the nolle prosequi certificates issued as invalid. Ramaphosa also wants to interdict Zuma from giving effect to the private prosecution.
Zuma is accusing his successor of being an alleged accomplice in the alleged leak of his health records by state prosecutor, Advocate Billy Downer.
Advocate Ngwako Maenetje says the legal bid by the former head of state will have an impact on the confidence entrusted to the office of the President.
“The first impact of the private prosecution on the office of the President is that as he alleges, it will result in an undue interference with his duties of office. He alleges that the unlawful private prosecution would have an adverse impact on the confidence in the republic and confidence in the office of the President.”
“Just stopping there, you have sufficient facts that on the broad constitutional standing requirement, even the office has a direct interest in the continuing unlawful private prosecution,” adds Maenetje.