So, what now?

I have just read the judgement of the Supreme Court of Appeals in the matter between one JG Zuma and the National Prosecuting authority. To borrow from the judge, the law reports are replete with judgements between the two parties, consequently there is no need to tell a long story here; because there is no story.

So, what does JZ do, faced with a judgement that undoes the Judgement of Nicholson? The latest judgement is to the effect that none of the rights of JZ were breached by the decision of the prosecuting authority to prosecute him without allowing him an opportunity to be heard. For me here is the clincher - it is the right of any accused person to make representations to the prosecuting authority, at any time prior to and during a criminal trial - this much JZ and his legal team knew.

Back to the question: what now? What now does judge Nicholson do? Probably nothing but, if the following is stated in writing about you as a judge, what would you do?

"This commendable approach [the independence of the judiciary, etc] was unfortunately subverted by a failure to confine the judgment to the issues before the court; by deciding matters that were not germane or relevant; by creating new factual issues; by making gratuitous findings against persons who were not called upon to defend themselves; by failing to distingish between allegation, fact and suspicion; and by transgressing the proper boundaries between judicial, executive and legislative functions."

How does the judge concerned continue to sit in judgment, especially in motion proceedings?

As for JZ, does he now approach the Constitutional Court and thereby buy himself a further 9 months or so? What would be the grounds for approaching the Constitutional Court? It should be borne in mind here that the latest judgment also holds JZ responsible for payment of some hefty cost orders. A cost order that includes the cost "consequent upon the employment of 3 counsel" sounds blerry expensive. There is that fundraising thing going on by the friends of JZ, so maybe costs of 3 counsel is not such a big deal. Where does it all end though?

What then happens, if the national prosecuting authority, sans Thabo Mbeki, brings the charges? Will JZ remember to make representations or will he just go straight to trial? How long would such a trial run? What will it costs? Let us not forget that it is to do with money, lots of it, that JZ finds himself in this jam in the first place.

What does the ANC do? The ANC has stated that JZ is their poster boy, come what may. JZ has stated himself that he will attend court and election rallies as may be required (if he has to stand trial ultimately, that is).

On the other hand, the judges are said to be counter-revolutionary. I don't know what this means and maybe, to work out what it means, I should first find out what revolutionary is. What in the context of this series of court cases qualifies as revolutionary? This I presume is the very thing that the judges are being counter to. Will then follow that Nicholson is a portrait of a revolutionary judge?

What would Thabo Mbeki do now that the Pikoli report and now the Harms judgment have made nought of the allegations of his political interference? Can an ex-president be unrecalled?

I wish I could tell the future . . . and then what?