opinionBy Pierre De Vos
What is the state’s case against Zuma? Is there any case to answer at all?
It is not surprising that former president Jacob Zuma has not provided any explanation for why he may be innocent of the recently reinstated charges of racketeering, corruption, money laundering and fraud.
His lawyers have so far successfully managed to use technical legal arguments (as well as the illegally obtained spy tapes and their influence with the pliable National Director of Public prosecutions) to prevent him from having to do so.
But what is the state’s case against Zuma? Is there any case to answer at all? To answer these questions, one must turn to the indictment prepared by the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) in the case against Zuma and Thint Holdings.
To understand why former president Jacob Zuma has been indicted for racketeering, corruption, money laundering and fraud, it is necessary to know some of the details about the relationship between Zuma, convicted fraudster Schabir Shaik and his company Nkobi Holdings, and French arms company Thint Holdings (and their associates Thomson-CSF/Thales).
The state alleges that Shaik and Nkobi Holdings made 783 payments to Zuma totalling the amount of R4,072,499.85 in the 10 year period…
AllAfrica News: Corruption Click here to read the original article