The statement by President Jacob Zuma's lawyers that he cannot be prosecuted during his term in office reveals the extent of the African National Congress's (ANC's) threat to the Constitution, Democratic Alliance (DA) leader Helen Zille said on Thursday.

Zille said the statement was made in an affidavit by Zuma's legal team in answer to the DA's application in the High Court in Pretoria to review the decision by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) to withdraw charges against Zuma shortly before the April 22 election.

"The NPA's decision, which the DA believes was unlawful and unconstitutional, gave Zuma a legally unencumbered run to the presidency," she said.

Zuma's reply to the DA, tabled by his lawyer Michael Hulley, contained "blatant untruths in the attempt to continue the Zuma camp's strategy of spinning out the case indefinitely".

"Most sinister of all, it undermines the Constitution by falsely claiming that a sitting President is above the law."

Paragraph 86 of Zuma's legal submission stated: "I have been advised that the incumbent State President, like the President of the US, cannot be charged with criminal conduct (or continue to be prosecuted) during his incumbency.

"Charges can only be brought if he is successfully impeached in terms of the Constitution or after his term of office ends. The President is presently 66 years old".

Zille said this statement was false. The South African Constitution did not exempt a sitting President from criminal prosecution.

Neither was the President of the US immune from criminal prosecution.

Paragraph 87 continued "the assault on the Constitution" by stating that "prosecution of an incumbent President will, inter alia, offend the doctrine of separation of powers by seriously interfering with the Executive and thereby subverting the entire constitutional framework".

This statement was absurd and inverted the meaning of "separation of powers", Zille said.

In fact the "separation of powers" doctrine existed precisely so that the executive could be held to account by the judiciary as well as the legislative arm of government.

In bringing the review application, the DA was reinforcing the concept of separation of powers.

"The latest move by President Zuma's lawyers demonstrates once again how important it is not to be beguiled by the President's personal charm.

"His public relations will not protect the Constitution. In fact, it is a convenient smokescreen behind which the assault on the Constitution continues unabated," she said.

The DA would continue to insist on the fundamental principle that everyone was equal before the law, and would continue to seek a High Court review of the "NPA's decision to shield the President from having to answer in court to over 700 counts ranging from corruption to racketeering that we believe were unlawfully dropped before the election".

"We will respond fully before the court in answer to this affidavit and those that must still be filed by the National Director of Public Prosecutions and the NPA," Zille said.