President Jacob Zuma finds himself in a corner today following the damning Gauteng High Court (Pretoria) judgment yesterday which struck the names of two senior officials from the roll of advocates, notes Legalbrief. The court removed the names of Deputy National Director of Public Prosecutions Nomgcobo Jiba and Specialised Commercial Crime Unit head Lawrence Mrwebi from the roll‚ following an application by the General Council of the Bar (GCB).

Although the NPA and neither the government nor the ANC have commented directly on the judgment, Justice Minister Michael Masutha indicated yesterday he had started the process of consulting National Director of Public Prosecutions Shaun Abrahams on the way forward. However, Freedom Under Law has noted Zuma indicated in another court matter that he would await judgment in the GCB case before deciding whether to act against Jiba. In a TimesLIVE report, Freedom Under Law, recalling the DA had earlier applied to the Western Cape High Court for an order that Zuma suspend Jiba, said the President’s response had been that the application was premature since he was awaiting judgment in the present (GCB) case. ‘Now‚ especially in light of today’s clear and damning findings – and notwithstanding possible applications for leave to appeal and similar delaying tactics – we trust these two will be suspended forthwith and that the President will act swiftly‚’ the organisation said. Political analysts say the judgment is a political setback for Zuma and his allies. ‘The tide is turning against Zuma allies,’ analyst Daniel Silke is quoted as saying in a Beeld report.

‘There are increasingly more questions about people Zuma appointed.' Ralph Mathekga, from the Mapungubwe Institute, said the judgment reinforced suspicions about Zuma’s hand in key appointments. ‘(The judgment) says that what Zuma has done in the NPA, as well as in other departments in the criminal justice system, is unjustifiable.’

Full TimesLIVE report

Full Beeld report

Speaking on television last night‚ Masutha said he could not comment on specific actions. ‘The parties concerned need to be engaged. I need to be engaged with the principal. I need to consult with the President. The President also exercises specific responsibilities‚’ Masutha told eNCA, according to a BDlive report. He said as soon as the parties had completed the consultation process‚ he would give an indication of what the course of action would be. Masutha said there were a few technical measures to consider as a legal representative of Jiba had indicated she wanted to take the matter on appeal. Masutha said it had been known that judgments of the courts of first instance had been overturned on appeal. ‘We cannot underestimate the significance of that. We have to take all factors into consideration in determining what would be the appropriate course to take.’ When asked if public confidence in the NPA had been eroded‚ Masutha said he did not believe the institution was in turmoil. ‘I believe the NPA is a solid organisation. I am confident we will be able to resolve the problems that have arisen and restore whatever confidence that may have been dented.’

Full BDlive report

Judge Francis Legodi delivered a scathing 109-page judgment, notes a News24 report. He wrote: ‘I cannot believe that two officers of the court who hold such high positions in the prosecuting authority will stoop so low for the protection and defence of one individual who had been implicated in serious offences.’ They should have stood ‘firm and vigorous’ and persisted with their prosecution of Richard Mdluli, erstwhile Police Crime Intelligence head, on fraud and corruption charges. He said: ‘By their conduct, they did not only bring the prosecuting authority and the legal profession into disrepute, but have also brought the good office of the President of the Republic of South Africa into disrepute by failing to prosecute Mdluli who inappropriately suggested that he was capable of assisting the President of the country to win the party presidential election in Mangaung during 2011 should the charges be dropped against him.’ The judge said: ‘It is this kind of behaviour that diminishes the image of our country and its institutions which are meant to be impartial, independent and transparent in the exercise of their legislative powers.’ Legodi said Mrwebi was supposed to be part of a system that effectively investigated and prosecuted the surge of corruption and fraud and Jiba was the ‘commander in chief’. He said Sibongile Mzinyathi‚ the NPA’s North Gauteng director and a third respondent in the application – the judge found against the GCB in his case – and former prosecutor Glynnis Breytenbach, who is now a DA MP, were ‘foot soldiers’ in this war. Jiba was supposed to ‘lead by example’. ‘But instead, she flouted every rule in the fight against crime. Her failure to intervene when she was required to do so has failed the citizens of this country and in the process, brought the image of the legal profession and prosecuting authority into disrepute. Both Mrwebi and Jiba should be found to have ceased to be fit and proper persons to remain on a roll of advocates.’

Full News24 report

The court found Jiba and Mrwebi wanting both in respect of the decision to drop corruption charges against Mdluli and in how they had handled the litigation with Freedom Under Law, which went to court to challenge the dropping of charges, says a Business Day report. Legodi described how their handling of the FUL case had led to three consecutive legal teams ‘all withdrawing within a short space of time, one after the other’. ‘Jiba was steadfast to do everything in her power to ensure that the charges against Mdluli were permanently withdrawn. ‘This was despite the prima facie evidence against Mdluli,’ said the judge. She had also ignored the ‘clearly relevant’ input of Glynnis Breytenbach, who had been involved in the prosecution of Mdluli, knowing that the law required her to consider it, said the judge. ‘Her motivation in adopting the attitude she did must be found in her willingness to protect Mdluli by all means.’ Mrwebi was also not spared by the judge, who said he had given dishonest evidence at the disciplinary proceedings against Breytenbach.

Full Business Day report (subscription needed)

The Full Judgment is available here

Jiba’s lawyer Zola Majavu confirmed she will appeal. ‘I can confirm that I discussed this matter with my client … she respects the judiciary and she respects the court’s court decision; however, she is going to appeal it and she has instructed us to start the process and I’m hoping to file that application for an appeal in the next couple of days,’ Majavu is quoted as saying in a BDlive report. Majavu said Jiba would remain in her position at the NPA until the appeal process had been concluded. She would need to vacate her position only if her appeal failed, as she would be ineligible to work at the prosecuting authority if she were struck off the roll. Majavu said the matter was not over, ‘not by a long shot’.

Full BDlive report

Jiba has been at the centre of several cases that could determine whether Zuma finishes his term in office, according to a Daily Maverick commentary. It says they relate to Mdluli, the Spy Tapes Case and the case around former KZN Hawks head Johan Booysen. Jiba, and her colleague, Mrwebi, have been the two big players in the fight for the soul of the NPA, says the DM. It notes that the last five years have seen the SCA make findings against both Jiba and Mrwebi for their conduct in several cases. The first, and probably the most important, was the case against Mdluli. He was accused of murder and other crimes. Jiba overruled the prosecutor in the case (Breytenbach). In this, she was backed by Mrwebi. Eventually, the SCA said their decision was wrong, and found that it had not been honestly made. Then, that same court made findings against Jiba again, because she had failed to hand over to the DA the infamous ‘spy tapes’ relating to the decision to withdraw corruption charges against Zuma. The DA wanted them for its own challenge to that decision. And then, in another ruling, in the KZN High Court (Durban), Jiba was found by a judge to have made an official decision to prosecute Booysen based on a signed document that constituted evidence – and which did not exist. The DM says it should be remembered that it appears in all of these cases that the person who ultimately benefits from these decisions is Zuma.

Full Daily Maverick commentary

Why Jiba and Mrwebi were stuck off (the full background)