Off the wire
• Slovenian police capture 26 illegal migrants  • Sweden extends border controls by six months  • Portugal's unemployment rate falls to 10.1 pct in Q1  • Macedonia's president calls on SDSM leader to guarantee unity  • France's Hollande accepts outgoing cabinet's resignation  • Spanish stock market falls 0.13 pct Wednesday  • Burundi's parliament urges EU to lift sanctions against Burundi  • Iranian police seize 4 tons of illicit drugs  • Three women charged with preparation of terrorist act in London  • Nadal, Djokovic made to work before progressing in Madrid  
You are here: 　 Home

Zuma files application to appeal court order over cabinet reshuffle

Xinhua, May 10, 2017 Adjust font size:

President Jacob Zuma on Wednesday filed an application to appeal a court ruling ordering him to submit the record and reasons of the decision to reshuffle the cabinet on March 31.

Zuma said the court ruling "violates the separation of powers".

The North Gauteng High Court ruled last week that Zuma must provide reasons for the cabinet reshuffle and hand over cabinet reshuffle records to the opposition Democratic Alliance, which had approached the court, seeking a court order to compel Zuma to do so.

The records allegedly contain intelligence Zuma used as "an excuse" to fire Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan in the cabinet reshuffle, which also saw the sacking or replacement of nine other ministers.

Zuma reportedly told the ANC top leadership before the reshuffle that he had received intelligence that Gordhan was seeking foreign assistance to topple him.

Zuma later said the cabinet reshuffle was based on the intelligence.

The reshuffle prompted international rating agencies Standard & Poor's and Fitch to downgrade South Africa's sovereign credit to junk status, respectively on April 3 and April 7.

In his Wednesday statement, Zuma gave 12 reasons for his decision to appeal the court ruling.

"The court ought to have found that not considering the nature of the executive decision in determining whether or not to furnish the record, would lead to a violation of the separation of powers doctrine, which is part of our constitutional scheme," Zuma said.

The court erred in not considering whether the remedy sought in the review can ever be obtained, he said.

The High Court ought to have found that the executive decision in question is the exercise of a constitutional power, and is a decision of the nature that does not call for the production of the record and reasons, said Zuma.

"Alternatively, it (the court) ought to have found that the statement of 31 March 2017 from the Presidency is sufficient to meet the test of rationality and therefore no further record was required," the president argued.

Zuma further contended that there is a reasonable prospect that another court will come to a different decision from that of the High Court and that the matter is one of considerable importance to the parties and the country. Endit