Malema warns against jailing Zuma

Picture: Bongiwe Mchunu/African News Agency (ANA)

Picture: Bongiwe Mchunu/African News Agency (ANA)

Published Feb 16, 2020


Cape Town - EFF leader Julius Malema has discouraged the state from sending former president Jacob Zuma to jail in the event that he is found guilty of

corruption relating to the arms deal saga.

This comes as Zuma is still fighting charges against him at the Pietermaritzburg High Court, with his next appearance being on May 6.

Addressing the Press Club of SA in Cape Town on Friday, Malema stressed that he believed Zuma had to account for the allegations against him before the courts.

“If there are charges against him, he must go to court and answer those charges,” said Malema.

He said he was however not convinced that Zuma had to be imprisoned if found guilty.

“Jail time for an old person like that is not advisable. What type of a society have we become to jail such old people? But it is for the court to decide,” he said.

“Zuma must go to court. Zuma must answer his allegations and the court must decide but in taking its decision, his age must be taken into consideration. The purpose of jail is correctional. That is why it is called correctional service, so we correct you and send you back to society. So, what are we going to correct with Zuma because he is an old man,” Malema said.

He said Zuma deserved alternative punishment if he was found guilty. 

Malema instead slammed why President Cyril Ramaphosa was still not charged for Marikana.

“If there is a person who must go to jail, it is Cyril, (former mineral resources minister) Susan Shabangu, (former police minister) Nathi Mthethwa and (former national commissioner) Riah Phiyega. Those are the people who have to go to jail for having killed our people (in) daylight,” he said.

He said Ramaphosa and other leaders had to be also subjected to orange overalls if Zuma was facing jail time.

He also slammed the court for issuing Zuma with a warrant of arrest when he failed to appear over a medical condition, instead of asking the doctor who produced his medical certificate to testify.