President Jacob Zuma needs to have his day in court and his offer to repay some of the money spent on his Nkandla home should be rejected, the IFP and UDM said yesterday.
The IFP sees this move as a sign that the president’s legal advisors have at last accepted that the chickens have come home to roost,” Inkatha Freedom Party chief whip Narend Singh said in a statement.
He said it was a poor attempt at creating a smokescreen ahead of the state of the nation address next Thursday.
The United Democratic Movement believed Zuma’s offer should be rejected outright.
Zuma’s lawyers proposed in a letter to the Constitutional Court on Tuesday that it appoint the Auditor-General and finance minister to determine the “reasonable cost” of those Nkandla features not related to security.
“To achieve an end to the drawn-out dispute in a manner that meets the public protector’s recommendations and is beyond political reproach, the president proposes that the determination of the amount he is to pay should be independently and impartially determined,” he said in a statement.
In her report, entitled Secure in Comfort, dated March 2014, Public Protector Thuli Madonsela recommended that Zuma pay back a reasonable portion of the R246m spent on upgrades to Nkandla not related to security – such as the swimming pool, cattle kraal, and amphitheatre.
The Economic Freedom Fighters had taken their bid to have Zuma repay the money to the Constitutional Court. It was expected to hear the matter next Tuesday. The Democratic Alliance and Public Protector had joined the court action.
UDM leader Bantu Holomisa said Zuma’s attempt to avoid further embarrassment and ridicule by the Constitutional Court should be rejected.
He said South Africa deserved better than Zuma.
“In the meantime the ANC must do us a favour and call him back.
He is a liability. Zuma has no respect for the people of this country,” he said.