Zuma explains opposition to virtual hearing in corruption trial
Former president Jacob Zuma and French arms company Thales' corruption trial is back in Pietermaritzburg High Court, with proceedings being held virtually.
Arguments were meant to be heard in Zuma's special plea application, which would see lead prosecutor Billy Downer recusing himself if granted.
But Zuma's council, Advocate Dali Mpofu, has applied for a two to three-week postponement in the matter.
He's told the court on Monday they are against the matter being heard virtually and that Zuma plans to give oral evidence in the application.
"The point of the matter is that we are now in the trial and the accused person is entitled to a public trial in his presence and we go further to say it's even worse if he has not had an opportunity to consult. Because my lord, let's forget about the legalities now. Let's look at it practically.
"We are saying to your lordship because of these intervening circumstances. We have not even been able to consult."
READ: Zuma's lawyers to seek postponement in corruption trail
Judge Piet Koen called for the matter to be heard virtually due to the current Covid-19 situation.
"All I am saying is the parties choose and it had my sanction that the issue raised by the special plea be dealt with by way of affidavit.
"It is a recognised procedure, we can deal with it on affidavit, and all I was saying is that the need for oral evidence would only arise if there is a material issue arising from the affidavits comparing or analysing the affidavits that there's a material issue on which there is a real dispute of fact and then that narrow point would be referred for the hearing of oral evidence."
The State argued matters heard virtually in court can be for all proceedings, adding that should not be any different for Zuma.
"Audiovisual links may be used in any proceedings where the presiding officer deems it appropriate and if to do so will prevent unreasonable delay, save costs or be convenient and makes it unnecessary for a person to appear in person in the courtroom," Advocate Wim Trengove said for the State.
"We're spot on. It is for all proceedings; it doesn't make for any distinctions between categories of proceedings at all. There are other provisions which cater for different types of proceedings, but there are and are meant to be general rules.
"Every court must strive to function optimally. That's the duty imposed on the courts and the fact that these rules cater for criminal cases as well is evident from paragraph 17."
READ: Inmates, correctional officials to get Covid jab from Tuesday
Zuma is following proceedings via an audiovisual link from the Estcourt Correctional Centre, where he is serving his sentence for contempt of court.
Trengove said the former president wouldn't be disadvantaged by the matter being heard virtually.
"So it is not even a limitation which is justified. There is no limitation to start off with because it is a fair public hearing and no less fairer and no less public than it would have been in a courtroom."
