Former President Jacob Zuma has lambasted yesterday’s Constitutional Court hearing on the State Capture Commission’s application for him to be jailed for showing contempt of an order of the apex court and for refusing to testify before the commission.

In a scathing, lengthy statement issued late last night, Zuma also fired a broadside at both the Constitutional Court and the wider judiciary, warning of the emergence ‘of a judicial dictatorship in SA’.

On the apex court, he said: ‘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.’

He went on: ‘All South Africans should be concerned about the dangerous situation we are heading towards. The core principles about separation of powers between the judiciary, legislature and the executive are being gradually weakened. More concerning for me ... is how the judiciary is now in the position where they are beyond reproach and the judges in this country are continuously taking extra powers to themselves to the detriment of legitimate democratic processes. I strongly agree with the public sentiment that is starting to see the emergence of a judicial dictatorship in SA.’

He warned that 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’.

Zuma said it was a travesty to observe how the Constitutional Court has allowed itself to be abused by the State Capture Commission.

‘The truth is that the commission approached the Constitutional Court directly to compel me to appear on the grounds that (the) commission was running out of time and that approaching a lower court as is the correct legal procedure, would have caused delays that would have affected the timelines around which the commission needed to finish its work.’

He said the Constitutional Court had failed to appreciate it was in fact rescuing the commission from its own inefficiencies and incompetence, and had chosen ‘to prejudice me and violate my constitutional rights by being the court of first and last instance by circumventing my right to the normal due process of having the judicial decision of a lower court remaining subject to review by a higher court’.

He also took a swipe at commission chair, Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo, describing the commission’s approach to the Constitutional Court as ‘a scheme to divert attention from the review application pending against Zondo’.

Says Zuma: ‘The commission persists with its convenient untruth which has now unfortunately received judicial endorsement that I have refused to give evidence before the commission.’

He said Zondo knew this was false. ‘What I have objected to, is appearing before Deputy Chief Justice Zondo against whom I have a pending review application to determine whether he should have recused himself from sitting in my appearances.’

He says Zondo’s conduct ‘continues to demonstrates bias against me, the nature of which disqualifies him from adjudicating any dispute regarding evidence presented at the commission involving me or my family’.

‘In short, the moment that he presented a disputed version of facts involving the nature of our past relationship, he became an adjudicator in his own case and therefore disqualified from adjudicating any dispute involving me fairly, impartially, and independently.’

The former President also questioned the inclusion on the Constitutional Court panel of Justice Dhaya Pillay, which he said was ‘was indeed curious if one considers her historical hostility and insults against me’.

He described her inclusion as a demonstration of the crises he argues are engulfing our judiciary. He claimed Pillay had previously insulted him by insinuating in her judgment that ‘I am “…a wedge driver with a poisonous tongue".’ 

He said Pillay is the same judge that issued a warrant of arrest against me as she refused to accept a medical report from the Surgeon-General of the SANDF. 

‘The same judge said that “It is in fact Mr Zuma who damaged the reputation of the ANC as a result of the allegations of fraud and corruption levelled against him. Removing Mr Zuma was therefore consistent with the country’s Constitution and in the interests of the ANC and the people of South Africa.” This was said in a case that had nothing to do with my role in the ANC and government.’

On her inclusion on the panel that sat in judgment over him yesterday, he noted: 'I would have expected that a court, acting impartially, would have the conscience of mind to exclude a judge that has made such statements against the subject of a matter before them.'

Full Zuma statement