South Africa's President Jacob Zuma violated the Constitution after he failed to repay millions of dollars in state funds to renovate his private home, the top court ruled today, prompting an impeachment proceeding against the embattled leader by the opposition.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) started a process to impeach 73-year-old Zuma after the Constitutional Court ruled that he had "failed to uphold, defend and respect the Constitution" as the supreme law of the land by disregarding the Public Protectors' report in irregular spending of millions of rands at his private residence in Nkandla.
The judgement comes as Zuma, African National Congress (ANC) leader is accused of having improper business links with wealthy Indian family of Guptas in South Africa.
The Gupta brothers Ajay, Atul and Rajesh, who built up an array of companies with interests in computers, mining, media and engineering, after moving to South Africa in the early 1990s, have denied the allegations, saying they are the victims of a plot.
Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng said that parliament, which is dominated by the ANC, had failed in its obligations by not holding Zuma to account in the spending scandal.
After an investigation two years ago, the Public Protector had called on Zuma to repay the costs, but he repeatedly refused to do so until just last month when he offered to pay back some of it.
"This pivotal judgment confirms the DA's long held contention that President Zuma seriously violated the Constitution when he sought to undermine the Public Protector's remedial actions by instituting parallel investigative processes, and his subsequent failure to implement her remedial action," DA leader Musi Maimane said ina statement.
Section 89(1) of the South African Constitution allows for the removal of the President from office on the grounds of a serious violation of the Constitution or the law if two-thirds of the House supports it.
"Today's ruling is clear in this regard -- President Jacob Zuma's action amounts to a serious violation of the Constitution, and constitutes grounds for impeachment," the DA said.
"Our Constitution is binding on all organs of state, including the President. To have ignored a constitutional organ, in the form of the Public Protector, for over two years, and to have employed a series of stratagems, including the Police Minister's Report and the three ad hoc parliamentary committees, to "second guess" and "ignore" the Public Protector required judicial action," the party said in a statement.
Meanwhile, Zuma said that he "noted and respects" the judgement handed down by the Constitutional Court and its findings.
(Reopens FGN 30)
"The President appreciates and reaffirms the powers of the Constitutional Court as a final arbiter on matters of the Constitution in the Republic of South Africa," the government said in a statement.
"The President will reflect on the judgement and its implications on the state and government, and will in consultation with other impacted institutions of state determine the appropriate action," the statement said.
"The President and government remain confident that our constitutional democracy remains strong and intact and affirms the Chapter 9 institutions established to strengthen and support the country's democracy. Government will in due course communicate further on the matter," it said.
The ANC released a similar statement acknowledging that the Constitutional Court is and remains the guardian of the Constitution of the Republic and the final arbiter on matters before it.
"The ANC once again reaffirms our full confidence in the judiciary and the upholding rule of law in South Africa. Given the serious nature of the judgement delivered, the African National Congress will study it in detail and comment further in due course," the statement said.
