JOHANNESBURG. Former Deputy president Jacob Zuma has finally been charged. And with him in the dock, as predicted, stands the French arms company Thales two subsidiaries in South Africa.
It was logical that the French arms giant would be charged as well, after the outcome of the Schabir Shaik trial. Shaik was sentences to 15 years for fraud and corruption. In the chain of events judge Squires described Thales-Thint as the corruptor, Shaik as the middleman and Zuma as the corrupted.
While the National Prosecution Authority had done a deal with Thales-Thint ahead of the Shaik trial, it felt that it could not turn a blind eye to the French arms dealers’ role in offering ZAR 500 000 to Zuma during this second trial. All cards must be on the table when a political heavy weight of Zuma´s caliber is on trial.
The hullabaloo around the trial, by far the most important trial with political implications since South Africa became a democracy, is growing by the day.
Two Johannesburg Sunday newspapers both trumpeted that Zuma may or may not have been accused of raping a 31-year old woman in the end of October.
The story so far seems very loose and inconclusive and no doubt fuels the strong suspicions among Zuma´s followers that there is a politically directed disinformation campaign against Zuma. The aim is to lock him up so that he cannot become South Africa´s next president. His backers are important folks, such as the General-Secretary of the ANC, the trade union bosses, the ANC youth folks as well as business men and women that have made their money with the help of Zuma in one way or the other.
Then, looking at it from the other side, it is clear that Zuma and his strategists are using politics to build a defense platform for their champion.
“It is democracy that is charged”, said Jacob Zuma in a revealing comment the day of the trial.
Considering that Zuma´s former adviser, Schabir Shaik, got 15 years, it would seem a foregone conclusion that Zuma will be found guilty of corruption.
Political analysts and legal experts are, however, not too sure of that. They worry that many of the 170 or so witnesses easily can change their tune during the forthcoming trial – it will start on 31 July next year.
They also worry that some evidence, used against Shaik, will turn out to be less clear-cut than it seemed. Judge Squires leaned heavily against a letter signed by Zuma in 2001 where he, on behalf of the Government, in a sneering tone turned down the possibility of a thorough investigation of South Africa´s ZAR 43 billion arms deal, thus stopping investigators to find out what Zuma himself was up to while the Government repeatedly said that the arms deal was totally clean and fair and that no Government minister had done anything unlawful.
But the Zuma defense disputes the origin of that document and says that it was a joint ministerial document that actually drawn up by president Mbeki himself.
Ultimately it is the former MD of Thompson (now Thint), Alain Thetard, who is the man who holds Zuma´s fate in his hands. Single-handedly he can decide, through his evidence, if Jacob Zuma will become South Africa´s next president or not. There would be nothing stopping Zuma, except for something along the lines of rape, from taking over the rein if he is acquitted.
It is not very likely though that Thetard´s employer will hand him over and let the South African justice have its course.
One thing is for sure, in absence of prima facie evidence against Zuma, a lot of attention will be spent on his persona, weather he is a good man caught in president Mbeki´s conspiratorial cobweb, or if he is that baddie who uses every trick in the book to turn the attention away from his own dirty dealings.
Comments are closed.