Zuma's legal troubles escalate: Court mandates repayment of R28.9 million
Former president Jacob Zuma is ordered to pay back R28.9 million in legal fees or face his assets being sold to recover the money.
Image: Itumeleng English / Independent Newspaper
Former President Jacob Zuma faces the imminent threat of losing his home and a portion of his State pension if he fails to repay R28.9 million, as mandated by the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.
Judge Anthony Millar has ruled that part of Zuma's State pension can be seized to cover his legal fees if he does not comply with the court's order.
Additionally, the judge stated that both Zuma's movable and immovable property could be subject to attachment.
If Zuma does not settle the debt within 60 days, the State Attorney is instructed to initiate a writ of execution for the seizure and sale of his assets.
While Zuma’s legal team said in court papers that he does not have the means to pay, the judge further ordered that interest should be added to some of his debt, calculated from last year up until he has paid the debt.
The order follows an application by the Presidency, the State Attorney and the Democratic Alliance for Zuma to pay the money previously paid for by the State towards his legal costs incurred and relating to his criminal prosecution and litigation instituted against him in his personal capacity.
Two courts - three judges of the Gauteng Division as well as the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled that Zuma, personally, had to pay back his legal fees. The Supreme Court of Appeal’s confirmation in April 2021 was followed with a letter of demand for repayment of R18.2 million addressed to Zuma. However, subsequently, in its preparation for the present proceedings, the State discovered an additional R10 699 426.
The judge said that he is bound by the decision of the two courts that Zuma had to pay the money back. This was in spite of arguments by counsel for Zuma who maintained that Zuma was not granted the money in the first place through corruption. His legal fees were paid from the State coffers following wrong legal advice to the state.
While Zuma did benefit from the money, it was not his doing that it was given to him. Those officials who allowed the State to pay for his legal fees up until the court in 2019 put an end to this, should be held liable to pay the money back as it was irregular expenditure, his counsel argued.
But Judge Millar said there is, given the context and the language of the respective judgments, simply no other rational interpretation that can be ascribed to the order in question other than that it was intended that Zuma personally be ordered to repay the R28 960 774 34.
He meanwhile placed the Office of the State Attorney on terms to report back to the court with regards to Zuma adhering to this court order and payments made by him.