On Monday, the Pietermaritzburg High Court in KwaZulu-Natal dealt another blow to Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma, adding to his list of setbacks
On Monday, September 11, the legal body did not grant the former South African President's request for authorization to appeal against a decision handed down by the same Court in June. The June ruling annulled a private prosecution that Zuma planned to launch against prosecutor Billy Downer and journalist Karyn Maughan. Therefore, this occurrence occurred as a result of the legal body's failure to respond to the former president's request.
In September 2022, Zuma began private proceedings. In this lawsuit, he alleged that Billy Downer disclosed confidential information about his health and that Kary Maughan published that information.
Zuma's tactic involved using the aforementioned allegation as a way of demonstrating that Downer did not have the necessary commitment to the situation at hand. This, in turn, would facilitate a greater effort to expel Downer from the ongoing corruption trial, in which Zuma himself is implicated.
In June last year, the judges presiding over the Pietermaritzburg High Court took the decision to annul the private prosecution that Jacob Zuma had launched. The reasoning behind this decision was that they believed the prosecution had been initiated with ulterior motives, such as delaying the start of the trial in the weapons purchase case. As a result, they concluded that the accusation constituted an abuse of power.
Zuma's legal team, unhappy with the outcome of his case, took action by sending a letter to the Pietermaritzburg High Court. His application was to be allowed to appeal the verdict issued in June of the previous year.
On September 11 of this year, the Court denied the request and upheld its previous verdict, believing that no other Court would render a different decision.
After carrying out a thorough analysis of the arguments presented by Zuma's legal team, the Pietermaritzburg High Court ruled that no new issues had been brought to light. Furthermore, the court concluded that there was little chance of the appeal being successful and therefore it was not considered necessary to grant leave.
Despite the importance of the case, the court did not consider it sufficiently convincing to justify further action. As a result, Zuma was instructed to cover the costs of the court case. At this time, neither Jacob Zuma nor his legal team have publicly announced their plans following the recent court ruling.
