R28.9 million at stake: Zuma's fight against legal fee liability

The Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, was on Monday confronted with the question as to why former president Jacob Zuma should be held liable to repay the R28.9 million bill for his private legal fees, while he is an innocent party and the real wrongdoers are the State officials who authorised the payments.

In asking for leave to appeal the judgment ordering him to pay back the money, Zuma’s advocate, Thabani Masuku, argued that neither the full court nor the Supreme Court of Appeal’s (SCA) orders ever said Zuma was the one liable for the legal bill.

Masuku told Judge Anthony Millar that he had erred in his judgment when he specifically pinpointed Zuma as the liable party.

He argued that Judge Millar’s judgment was premised on the previous two judgments, which simply said the money had to be paid back into the State coffers due to irregular expenditure.

“The question this court should have asked is whether it is justifiable and equitable to hold Mr Zuma liable to pay this enormous amount if the full court never found he acted unlawfully,” Masuku said.

This prompted Judge Millar to question whether Zuma should not be held liable, although he was the beneficiary of the State funds.

Masuku responded that the State Attorney and the President made the decision that Zuma was entitled to State funding. This decision was later overturned as being unlawful, but Masuku maintained that Zuma never asked for the money.

The State is the protector of the public purse, he said, thus Zuma is not the wrongdoer here. He questioned why no steps were taken against the State officials who authorised the unlawful payments in the first place. Instead, Zuma was chosen as the party that had to foot the bill because he is an easy target, Masuku argued.

He told Judge Millar that the leave to appeal should be granted to either the full court (three judges) of this division or to the SCA, as they would see matters in a different light.

In opposing the application, counsel for the President and the other State Departments, Advocate George Avakoumides, argued that both the previous courts made it clear that the money must be paid back and that Zuma is liable.

He said it was not for this court to examine whether Zuma should be held accountable and to examine the submissions made in the full court and the SCA.

“It is clear that it is he (Zuma) who has to pay the money back,” Avakoumides said.

Masuku, meanwhile, also objected to Judge Millar ordering in favour of the Democratic Alliance that Zuma had to pay interest on the legal fees amount.

He said apart from the DA, this never formed part of the application.

Judge Millar previously ordered Zuma to make the R28.9 million payment to the State Attorney, as well as pay interest as calculated at the prescribed rate. He was given 60 days in which to settle the debt, and if he failed, the State Attorney could attach his assets.

The appeal proceedings, however, placed that order on hold for now. Judgment was, meanwhile, reserved in the leave to appeal application.

zelda.venter@inl.co.za