The National Director of Public Prosecutions has filed papers opposing former president Thabo Mbeki's Constitutional Court appeal against parts of Judge Chris Nicholson's ruling on ANC president Jacob Zuma.

A Constitutional Court spokesman said NDPP Mokotedi Mpshe filed notice of his intention to oppose the application and filed his answering affidavit on Friday.

While Zuma's lawyers earlier in the week announced that he would oppose the application, it was only on Friday that the Constitutional Court received formal notice of his intention.

The court had given Zuma and Mpshe until Friday to respond. Both are named as respondents in Mbeki's appeal.

Mbeki wrote in his founding affidavit: "I bring this application in my personal capacity and in my capacity as President of the Republic of South Africa, as head of the national executive, as well as in thepublic interest."

His resignation took effect on Thursday when ANC deputy president Kgalema Motlanthe was named the country's new president.

Mbeki is appealing against "certain findings" by Justice Chris Nicholson in his September 12 judgment that the prosecution of Zuma on racketeering, money-laundering, corruption and fraud charges was invalid.

He is asking the Constitutional Court to order that the high court "ought not to have made findings of and concerning" him "without having afforded him a hearing" and that these findings "constitute a violation of his rights". He wants the findings set aside.

In the affidavit, Mbeki said Zuma appeared to have alleged that there must have been political interference in the decision to prosecute him.

He "ascribed as a motive for that the alleged rivalry between the two of us for the position of president of the African National Congress".

Mpshe, it appeared from the judgment, sought to "strike out the allegations of political interference" from Zuma's affidavits.

"I respectfully submit that it was not necessary for the learned judge to make the findings I am appealing against, or seeking to set aside, in order for him to decide the real issue that was before him," Mbeki wrote.

"In any event, it was improper for the court to make such far-reaching findings... without first giving us a hearing."

Mbeki noted that the high court found it unfair and unjust of him to have relieved Zuma of his duties given that he had not had a chance to defend himself in a court of law, that rivalry between him and Zuma had impacted on the case, and that his decision to stand against Zuma for the ANC presidency was controversial.

The court also concluded that former justice minister Penuell Maduna interfered with the execution of duties of former national director of public prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka, with the knowledge of Mbeki.

It implied that while the decision to prosecute National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi was not palatable to Mbeki, the decision to prosecute Zuma was.

It further inferred that the timing of Mpshe's decision to indict Zuma, together with the suspension of Ngcuka's successor Vusi Pikoli, indicated ongoing political influence which Mbeki not only knew about, but agreed to.

"I deny all the allegations against me and also dispute the truth and correctness of the 'findings' relating to me... ," Mbeki stated.

"These findings are serious and have, in fact, been prejudicial to me... The findings do not only suggest that I have acted improperly or without integrity, all of which are injurious to my good name, reputation and my right to human dignity... but also go further in that they in effect say that I have failed to fulfil the constitutional
obligation to uphold and respect the constitution as the supreme law of the Republic."

Mbeki submitted that although the findings were "irregular", they had been widely publicised and were generally taken by members of the public to be correct.

"It is now a matter of public record that the national executive of the African National Congress has been moved by these findings to recall me from my post as President of the Republic of South Africa."

He further submitted that it was "unfair and unjust" for him to be "judged and condemned" on the basis of the findings in the Zuma matter.

"The interests of justice, in my respectful submission, would demand that the matter be rectified."