Publications
Partners
After threatening to spill the beans for years, his delusion of a political conspiracy was instead exposed by his testimony, writes Modidima Mannya.
Former president Jacob Zuma’s appearance and conduct at the Zondo commission into state capture was a real tragedy, although one long waiting to happen. The characterisation that he has invented a conspiracy and seeks to delegitimise the commission is unfair. On the contrary, he has given the commission more legitimacy and justification for its existence.
Zuma has also exposed the human side of the commission, which afforded him a courtesy he does not deserve. We must not give Zuma an accolade he does not deserve as this will encourage him to upgrade his sense of delusion even further.
For years, Zuma has been threatening to spill the beans on his imaginary political conspiracy against himself and the thieves within the system. In true delusional style, he also went around questioning if there was any state capture at all.
When he claimed to have been provoked beyond measure, it sounded like he was about to unleash a nuclear warhead on his detractors and, once and for all, deliver on his old promises. Because he threatened to unleash his missiles so many times, one can be forgiven for believing that he needed some unburdening.
It seems as if Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo had to become a therapist and deal with a troubled soul that needed to be unburdened. True to his character, Zondo exercised the most patience to create a conducive environment for his patient to offload. Then, true to his character, Zuma instead remained resistant and confused about whether he should tell all and be helped or try some new tricks to avoid taking responsibility.
‘MA BARE BARE’
There is this thing called “ma bare bare”, the vernacular equivalent for hearsay or gossip. In law, it is inadmissible as evidence. It needs the source of the hearsay to come forward and confirm what he/she told whomever seeks to rely on that hearsay. It is not about whether what is said is true or not, but whether whomever seeks to rely on it has actual personal knowledge of the facts she/he seeks to rely on.
A lot of what Zuma said, which some call a conspiracy, borders rather on cheap hearsay that must be dismissed. I gained the impression that some people realised his weakness of lack of logic and abused him with false information. His feeble attempt to hide behind having been a head of intelligence or getting information from sources who may not exist, hardly lends credibility to what is clearly gossip used as supposed evidence.
For any weight to be attached to this gossip, his sources will have to follow him to the commission to confirm the stories he claimed he was told. That will be a tall order when everything seems so imaginary.
Zuma pretended not to remember why he established the commission in the first place. He may have conveniently forgotten he was the real trigger that led to the commission being established. At the time, he had little choice. If he can vividly remember things that happened more than 25 years ago, he can easily remember what happened a few years ago. He has already sold his right not to remember.
He must start adjusting to the reality that his “I cannot remember” answer is simply an admission of guilt about what was said about him. His attempt to destroy the credibility and question the character of those who testified against him has in law opened the door for questions into his own character. This must be one of the reasons he now wants to run away.
SPILL THE BEANS
When Zuma first made the threat to spill the beans, the two people he mentioned as spies were in his corner. He was not even the ice boy of that family then. He could not have imagined being brought before a commission of inquiry into state capture. Later, when the pressure was overwhelming to appoint the commission, he again threatened to expose the thieves. His more pronounced threat was made in Parliament. Even with parliamentary immunity, he failed to name even one person.
It defies logic for Zuma to think and to believe that the commission can base any findings on the suggestions and innuendo he makes. He must have been advised that the rules of evidence would not permit that. To even suggest that whatever Zuma said at the commission is evidence is such an insult to common sense.
The conspiracy, if any, is when Zuma, after so many witnesses implicated him, tried his luck by avoiding actually denying the allegations against him. Instead, he provided countervailing evidence and put his version across. No doubt he would have been advised that failure to challenge the versions already before the commission and which implicate him renders them as admitted facts.
The best way forward for him would be to create his own confusion and try to make a case to run away from responsibility – as usual. Whoever advises him would have told him about this established principle of law.
Zuma could have not, by any stretch of the imagination, have been confused that he had to challenge the allegations made against him. He once claimed that he was not implicated in state capture even as every second witness mentioned his name. When he was provided with witness statements, he probably chose to mislead himself that his name was not mentioned in them.
ADVERSE INFERENCES
Zuma must have been warned about the risk of adverse inferences being drawn from his conduct. He knows very well that the evidence he gives cannot be used against him in any subsequent legal proceedings. He therefore has nothing to fear and cannot hide behind the fear of self-incrimination. Zuma is trapped in his own delusions after lying to himself and creating the impression that he could expose others. Clearly, he has nothing more than his own wild imagination to rely on.
Giving him three hours to say nothing was a good trap for him. He had nine wasted years with the protection of parliamentary immunity to expose those who conspired against him – the spies and the thieves. He seems to have never had anything but empty threats. Now he cannot deal with it.
Mannya is an advocate and writer
