Pietermaritzburg, South Africa – The Pietermaritzburg High Court has rejected applications by former president Jacob Zuma and French arms company Thales, who sought to declare that they could not receive a fair trial following the deaths of key witnesses.
Judge Nkosinathi Chili ruled on Tuesday that the trial court should determine whether the absence of these witnesses would prejudice the proceedings. The case, involving corruption and racketeering linked to South Africa’s controversial 1999 multi-billion rand arms deal, has been adjourned to December 4.
Key Arguments Dismissed
Thales had argued that the deaths of its former directors in South Africa—Pierre Moynot and Alain Thetard—in the 1990s and early 2000s made it impossible to challenge the state’s evidence. Similarly, Zuma’s legal team claimed his right to a fair trial would be compromised without their testimony.
However, Judge Chili found that neither Zuma nor Thales had sufficiently proven that the missing witnesses would cause “irredeemable, irreparable, or insurmountable prejudice” to their defense.
“The court seized with the matter has a duty to consider all the evidence before it, including the non-availability of defense witnesses, before returning a verdict,” Chili stated.
Case Background
Zuma and Thales face charges related to alleged bribes exchanged during South Africa’s arms procurement in the late 1990s. The case has faced numerous delays over the years, with Zuma previously arguing that prosecutorial misconduct should invalidate the trial.
The latest ruling means the long-delayed trial will proceed, with the next hearing set for December. Legal analysts suggest that while the defense may still raise witness-related concerns during trial, the High Court’s dismissal strengthens the state’s position.
What’s Next?
With the December date set, both sides will prepare for trial proceedings, where the impact of the deceased witnesses’ absence will be further scrutinized. The case remains a high-profile test of South Africa’s judicial system, given Zuma’s political influence and the enduring controversy surrounding the arms deal.
For now, the court has reaffirmed that the trial must go on.