President Jacob Zuma has filed his replying affidavit to the SCA in his bid to challenge the Gauteng High Court (Pretoria) ruling that he should face corruption charges, says a News24 report. In June, the High Court dismissed Zuma's leave to appeal its corruption decision. The NPA and Zuma’s lawyers are seeking leave to appeal the ruling, on 29 April, that the decision to discontinue the prosecution against Zuma on 783 corruption charges be set aside.

Judge Aubrey Ledwaba said that then-NPA head Mokotedi Mpshe had acted irrationally after coming under pressure. In his affidavit, Zuma said the case was ‘important’ to him and raised matters of ‘public interest’. He still maintains that it was not in the ‘public interest’ to prosecute him and that the timing of his charges had been manipulated.

‘The applicant (Zuma) emphasises that the DA cannot contest that the matter raises matters of such great public importance … and was important to Zuma,’ the affidavit by lawyer Michael Hulley said. Hulley said the appeal would also clarify the interpretation of the laws that an NPA head can use to stop the prosecution of a person. It was ‘perfectly rational’ for Mpshe to drop charges against Zuma as ‘the merits of the case did not outweigh public interest’.

Full News24 report

Full Daily Dispatch report (subscription needed)

The DA remains confident Zuma’s application for leave to appeal will be dismissed. 'The President’s insistence on pursuing a losing case is out of sheer desperation to avoid having his day in court‚’ the party’s James Selfe is quoted as saying in a TimesLIVE report. ‘It is an exercise into which more taxpayer rands will be needlessly plundered.’ Selfe added ‘that there are no reasonable prospects of success nor are there any other compelling reasons why the appeal should be heard’ as Zuma ‘persists in the narrative that there was a political conspiracy against him’. This itself ‘reaffirms the DA’s position that the dropping of the 783 charges of fraud and corruption levelled against Zuma ... was for political reasons and not legal ones’, notes Selfe.

Full TimesLIVE report

Zuma’s replying affidavit