Two things that may have spooked Jacob Zuma in report
Thuli Madonsela says the president appears to have breached the Constitution and ignored executive ethics
President Jacob Zuma may have been spooked by the public protector’s initial notice on her probe on state capture to him, in which she listed initial evidence against him indicating that he may have contravened the Executive Ethics Code and been in breach of the Constitution.
A section 7(9) notice in terms of the Public Protector Act provides that during the course of an investigation a person implicated in what may become an adverse finding should be afforded an opportunity to respond.
The Presidency has cried foul over the process, saying that the meeting of October 6 was intended to be a "briefing session" to a Section 7(9) notice.
Public Protector Thuli Madonsela was meant to release her report on state capture on Friday, a day before her seven-year term ended. She was prevented from doing so because Zuma — after initially agreeing to meet her — requested in a first meeting that she leave the probe to her successor to conclude, and then asked to interview her witnesses ahead of a scheduled second meeting.
He subsequently applied for a court interdict to block the release of the report.
In the notice sent to Zuma, the public protector details the complaints laid, her observations and the evidence against him.
In it she alleges that Zuma failed to act on allegations that members of the Gupta family and his son, Duduzane, offered Cabinet posts to Deputy Finance Minister Mcebisi Jonas and former MP Vytjie Mentor, and that the president had sought to solicit assistance from an official of state to benefit members of the Gupta family — who he had acknowledged as his friends.
The president, therefore, "appeared" to have violated the Executive Ethics Code and failed to have regard for the provisions of section 195 of the Constitution requiring that the president "uphold a high standard of professional ethics and act in the best interests of" SA.
She observes that Zuma publicly "denounced the allegations of state capture, stating there is no such thing, which in so doing, was a public repudiation of allegations by Jonas, Mentor, Themba Maseko and any other person that may have wanted to come out and make allegations of state capture by the Guptas".
She confirms that during her probe, she obtained information that corroborated Jonas’s claims — this includes that he was offered the position of finance minister by members of the family ahead of the axing of Nhlanhla Nene in 2015.
Jonas also confirmed that Zuma had not discussed the issue with him.
On Friday at a media briefing Madonsela said she had decided not to release the report because it was "good practice".
"Just because you deal with underhanded people does not mean you have to be underhanded," she said, later clarifying that she was not talking about the president. She also declined to comment on whether Zuma had acted in bad faith by failing to answer her questions.
She told journalists she had finalised the state capture report on Friday and signed off on it.
On Friday, the Mail & Guardian reported that a judicial commission of inquiry was recommended in the report.
She agreed not to release the report out of respect for the courts — Zuma’s application is set to be heard on Tuesday.
