BREAKING: Zuma interdicts Public Protector Thuli Mandonsela

Mike Hoxbig said:
That would just shame him publicly, and we know that he couldn't care less about his reputation. It is not legally binding unless her office releases it officially...
Click to expand...

The outcry would be hugely damaging to the ANC who would actually have to do something?
 
Zuma stops Madonsela from releasing state capture report

President Jacob Zuma has stopped Public Protector Thuli Madonsela from releasing the draft report on her investigation into state capture, after he served her with a notice of intention to interdict her.

Zuma served Madonsela with the notice on Thursday, which will mean the Public Protector will not be able to release the report on Friday, as she had planned.

The application to interdict is due to be heard in court on Tuesday.

A source in Madonsela's office said: "We cannot proceed to release the report until the court has decided whether or not to grant the interdict."

Friday is Madonsela's final day in office.
Click to expand...
http://www.timeslive.co.za/politics...Madonsela-from-releasing-state-capture-report
 
Someone just leak it and be done with it already!
 
Ah, if I read correctly, it's probably a interim interdict that has been granted until Tuesday. This means that it is enforced.

Read here -> https://www.ensafrica.com/news/a-brief-discussion-on-interdicts?Id=209

Points 2 and 3

*edit* I see the times article talks about a "notice to interdict" but I don't read that as having a restraining standing? Well not in the above reference.
 
"he served her with a notice of intention to interdict her". She hasn't been interdicted. So surely she can ignore it?
 
Zuma is breaking the oath he made when he became president of South Africa by a country mile and he is getting away with it

he definitely has a crap load to hide and is using everything in his power to prevent it being made public. Being in his last term he gives no damn about ruining his reputation.
 
Kosmik said:
Ah, if I read correctly, it's probably a interim interdict that has been granted until Tuesday. This means that it is enforced.

Read here -> https://www.ensafrica.com/news/a-brief-discussion-on-interdicts?Id=209

Points 2 and 3

*edit* I see the times article talks about a "notice to interdict" but I don't read that as having a restraining standing? Well not in the above reference.
Click to expand...
From what I would guess is he is treating her interim findings report similar to a negative newspaper article. He just doesn't want it published, He will soon own the newspaper when his lackey takes charge so he only needs to keep Thuli quiet until then.
 
Mike Hoxbig said:
But it's an intention to interdict, not an interim interdict?
Click to expand...
surely Zuma's lawyers aren't daft enough to issue a notice to interdict? I suspect the newspapers don't have their facts straight?
 
Interesting dilemma .

Her tenure ends tomorrow, so, until tomorrow, she could release the report. The Interdict will only be heard on Tuesday ----

Let us say the Judge decides NOT to grant the Interdict. Would she be able to them release the report anyway even though she is no longer in office? Or, would her replacement now be forced to release the report?
 
Sinbad said:
The outcry would be hugely damaging to the ANC who would actually have to do something?
Click to expand...

The ANC ignored the state capture allegations when they were first made. They went on that little white wash investigation and then closed it claiming none of the complainants agreed to make written submissions, why would they care about an unbinding report?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X