Sign in
Download Opera News App

News Politics




Africa politics

Mpofu maintains that it was within Fraser's rights to offer Zuma what he did. So, have you seen this

Attorney General Dali Mpofu argued before the Supreme Court of Appeal that medical parole for Jacob Zuma should not be challenged in court.

According to him, Arthur Fraser didn't break the law by approving the parole.

Mpofu argued that the parole denial made by the board of advisors may have been illegal.

Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) proceedings on Monday focused largely on the legal prospects of former president Jacob Zuma and the potential abuse of power by former correctional services commissioner Arthur Fraser.

The ex-president appealed to the SCA after the Supreme Court ruled that his medical parole release from last year was unlawful and made no sense.

When Fraser decided to release Zuma on medical parole after serving only two months of his 15-month term, the Democratic Alliance, AfriForum, and the Helen Suzman Foundation all filed petitions against the release. Medical parole reviewers felt Zuma should remain in prison.

In releasing Zuma on parole, Dali Mpofu, the former president's attorney, believes Fraser made the correct decision.

Mpofu claimed that Fraser did not abuse his position and cast doubt on the board's legitimacy.

Zuma has Mpofu, a fatal ailment, and this is "proven beyond a reasonable doubt."

That's a board of advisors, right? Sometimes ministers take the advise of their boards, and other times they don't. Mpofu said that the law would have specified that the advisory board was to make such a determination if it had intended for that to be the case.

Since his conclusion rested on Section 75 of the Correctional Services Act, he argued that the former president's appeal couldn't rest solely on that provision (7a).

As for me, all I'm saying is that you're wrong if you only read [that particular section].

Despite the first impression that we were only concerned with Section 75, he clarified in the subsequent statement that Sections 79 and 75 should be read together.

Mpofu added that the former president's parole application was filed by Dr. Mafa, who had provided irrefutable evidence that Zuma's terminal sickness was real.

Mpofu responded, "It's an opinion," when questioned whether this could be considered a conclusion by an expert.

Mpofu explained that the former president's medical records "are, by definition, classified" when asked about the redacted medical parole application and why Fraser had access to the complete version.

According to Mpofu, medical professionals should not be subject to cross-examination in court.

The court asking, "How can a medical professional know more than a judge?" They had to have done their jobs as professionals if they say the individual has an illness that will kill him. It's time to ask, "What do we do?"

If you're interested in reading other articles, you may do so by following.

A like, remark, and share would be greatly appreciated.


Content created and supplied by: Uptodown_News (via Opera News )

Dali Mpofu Fraser SCA Supreme Court Supreme Court of Appeal


Load app to read more comments