Former president Jacob Zuma

• Jacob Zuma has slammed the judiciary over a “political onslaught” against him.
• His foundation said it was not surprised by the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling against him.
• The foundation also lashed out at the media following an admission by Deputy Chief Justice Raymond Zondo he had fathered a child with a sister of one of Zuma‘s wives in the mid-1990s.

Former president Jacob Zuma has launched an attack on the judiciary, claiming there is a political onslaught against him.

The Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma Foundation said it was not astonished by the Supreme Court of Appeal ruling against Zuma on Friday.

The second largest court in the country, situated in Bloemfontein, dismissed with punitive costs an appeal against the order of the North Gauteng High Court imposing personal costs against him.

Zuma, who was directly implicated in the improper conduct referred to in the State Capture Report published by former Public Protector Thuli Madonsela in 2016, was required to appoint a judge selected by the chief justice to head a commission of inquiry into the allegations of state capture using the report as a starting point.

He was appealing an order against him by a full Bench of the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria.

It ordered Zuma to pay, in his personal capacity and on a punitive scale, the costs of his failed application to review and set aside a decision by Madonsela.

READ | It hasn’t been a good year for former president Jacob Zuma

“While we did not expect any positive outcome from a South African court in a matter relating to president Zuma, we had hoped that our courts would have some decency to steer clear from politics.

“We note that our courts have become part of the political onslaught against president Zuma, bending the law in order to serve political elites that seek to scapegoat president Zuma for all the ills that confront South Africa.

“It is clear that punishing Zuma has become a guarantee for a career in the judiciary. We implore the deputy chief justice [Raymond Zondo] to maintain the decorum of a judge, even if he is mandated by the hidden backroom masters and their advisors to produce a particular outcome,” the foundation said.

It also lashed out at the media following an admission by Zondo he had fathered a child with Zuma’s wife Thobeka Madiba’s sister in the mid-1990s.

“This, the media knows, but ignored it in order to propagate lies about  Zuma. In doing this, they deliberately ignored the fact that the admission was made by the deputy chief justice himself. We have already expressed our reservations about the appropriateness of media statements by the deputy chief justice. We maintain that these statements are reserved for Zuma and no other witness.

“They [the media] are part of the pattern that has emerged from our courts, to develop jurisprudence that seeks to deal with Zuma and those thought to be associated and aligned to him.

“We wish to remind the public that the application for the recusal of the deputy chief justice has not been filed and attributing this disclosure to him and his lawyers is mere mischief designed to save the image of the deputy chief justice,” said the foundation.

It added the timing of Zondo’s media statement admitting fathering a child was indeed intriguing as it was clear it was the advice of the hidden backroom masters and their advisors, trying in vain to do a pre-emptive strike for their man.

“It is rather curious that the deputy chief justice deemed it necessary and appropriate to comment on a matter that is still to be placed before him for adjudication.

“Neither Zuma nor his lawyers ever mentioned the issue of fathering a child by the deputy chief justice. It is rather unfortunate for the media and its sponsored analysts stooped so low as to be part of the deputy chief justice’s inappropriate propaganda and publicity stunt,” the foundation said.