The Inkatha Freedom Party welcomes the unanimous judgment handed down in the North Gauteng High Court today State which found that President Jacob Zuma be held personally liable for costs incurred in his abortive attempt at interdicting the release of the public protectors report on State Capture.

IFP Chief Whip in Parliament and Commissioner on the Judicial Services Commission, Hon. Narend Singh, MP, said, “This is a decisive and landmark judgment by the North Gauteng High Court.

It should send a clear message that no matter your status or public office, you will held personally liable should it be found that you are using tax payer money for your own personal matters. The Court although not pronouncing as regards alleged perjury by the President, went as far as calling the State President, an “Unreasonable litigant” which we believe largely characterises all of the Presidents appearances in our courts since his assumption of office,”

“We expect that bills of costs will now be taxed by the taxing master at the high court in this matter and then presented to the President for prompt settlement. In the event of president being unable
to settle these costs, then and in that event, the Sheriff of the Court would have the right to attach assets owned by Mr Zuma,”

“We also welcome and applaud the second judgment handed down in the North Gauteng High Court today, as regards the Presidents review application into the scope of powers and remedial action prescribed by the public protector in the State Capture report, which report found serious prima facie findings against the President in respect of certain improper relationships between himself, members of the Gupta family and certain other state officials.

In this Judgment the court also rightly found that because of the President being personally implicated in State Capture report, that the public protectors recommendation that Chief Justice appoint the Judge to preside over the Judicial Commission of Inquiry, is wholly reasonable, appropriate and in the public interest.

We welcome the court’s dismissal of this review application with a personal costs order against the President as well as the court’s reaffirmation of powers and importance of the office of the Pub lic Protector,” concluded Singh, MP.

 

Issued by IFP