Former President Jacob Zuma's latest statement in which he attacks the judiciary could precipitate a constitutional crisis, writes the Serjeant at the Bar columnist in an opinion piece on the News24 site.

 The writer points out that in its judgment of 28 January 2021, when the Constitutional Court ordered Zuma to appear before the commission, Justice Chris Jafta ruled: ‘The respondent's (Mr Zuma) conduct in defying the process lawfully issued under the authority of the law is antithetical to our constitutional order. We must remember that this is a republic of laws where the Constitution is supreme. Disobeying its laws amounts to a direct breach of the rule of law, one of the values underlying the Constitution and which forms part of the supreme law. In our system, no one is above the law. Even those who had the privilege of making laws are bound to respect and comply with those laws. For as long as they are in force, laws must be obeyed. In these circumstances, I am satisfied that the claim for compelling the respondent to obey process from the commission and testify before it, has been established.’

However, in his statement, Zuma remained obstinate: ‘I strongly agree with the public sentiment that is starting to see the emergence of a judicial dictatorship in SA. We have in SA today the gradual entrenchment of the counter-majoritarian problem. Unfortunately, when people rise up against this judicial corruption, our young democracy will unravel and many democratic gains will be lost in the ashes that will be left of what used to be our democratic state. Ordinarily and if I had faith that a South African court would consider my submissions, I would present them to the Constitutional Court. However, my experience is that many South African judges, including those of the Constitutional Court, can no longer bring an open mind to cases involving me as they have done in awarding legal costs against me in a case I had not participated in.’

The author says these claims fail to deal with the core findings of the court that no one is above the law.

In his statement, Zuma seeks to cast the second most senior judge in the country as a liar, and also launches ‘vicious attacks against Justice Dhaya Pillay, who had found against him.

Says the author: ‘The reason that this reaction may precipitate a constitutional crisis is two-fold: Zuma has run a campaign to undermine the legitimacy of the judiciary and in particular the highest court in the land.’

While Zuma is entitled to criticise the judgments of the court and the jurisprudence of Pillay, ‘to cast totally unfounded aspirations on judges and their credibility damages the constitutional design’.

The second reason,  says the writer, is that Zuma’s statement is designed to whip up those who ‘have no commitment to constitutionalism and are now even more emboldened to continue their project of installing the rule of the rent capturer in place of constitutional governance’.

Full analysis on the News24 site