South Africa’s Constitutional Court has excluded 82-year-old former President Zuma from parliamentary elections scheduled for next week. There are major fears of unrest – and his supporters are threatening violence.

TV channels are broadcasting live, Zuma’s fans are gathering before the Constitutional Court, and the public interest is huge. Little wonder, after all, that the Constitutional Court, South Africa’s highest court, had to decide a highly explosive legal dispute.

A far-reaching decision by the court

The proceedings were not just about the political future of the 82-year-old. Rather, the question is whether the requirements of the state constitution apply equally to all candidates in next week’s parliamentary elections – and therefore the credibility and legitimacy of these elections as a whole.

The judges had to decide whether former president Jacob Zuma could run for a seat in Parliament despite his criminal record.

Zuma has a criminal record

It sounds like a legal quirk, but it’s not. Anyone who has been sentenced to one year or more in prison is not allowed to run for office for five years after the end of their sentence – this is stipulated in the South African Constitution.

According to the country’s electoral commission, this is exactly what applies to Jacob Zuma. In the summer of 2021, he became the first former head of state in South African history to be jailed for 15 months because he refused to testify in court about rampant corruption during his time in office.

Zuma has State-owned projects exploited

According to an independent investigative report, during Zuma’s rule from 2009 to 2018, Zuma, along with his political and business accomplices, took control of the country and systematically plundered state-owned enterprises such as the electricity company Eskom and the railway company Transnet.

However, Zuma was released after three months behind bars for health reasons. The remainder of the sentence was waived by current President Cyril Ramaphosa. Therefore, Zuma said that the 15-month prison sentence was no longer valid, and that there was nothing standing in the way of his candidacy.

In addition, he was not punished for a crime, but “only” for violating court orders. And: Whether he should be allowed to stand for election should not be decided by the court, but rather later by the newly elected Parliament.

But the South African Supreme Court sees the matter completely differently. A sentence is a sentence, and even the overturning of the sentence cannot change that, the country’s top judges decided in the final court.

Ballots have already been printed

According to legal experts, this measure put constitutional judges in a difficult position shortly before the parliamentary elections. Of course, the legal decision also has serious political consequences.

Without its driving force, Jacob Zuma, as the main candidate, the KP may end up having a harder time stealing votes from the ANC on election day – although Zuma’s name and face will remain on ballot papers in the election. Because they have already been printed and can no longer be exchanged when the election approaches.

Zuma supporters threaten violence

In a joint appeal, 40 NGOs called on all concerned to respect the decision of the country’s highest court. There is great concern about a repeat of the unrest of 2021. Shortly after the verdict against Jacob Zuma, more than 300 people were killed in riots. Supporters of the former president recently publicly threatened to commit new acts of violence if Zuma was excluded from the parliamentary elections.

Zuma polarizes the country

Zuma has polarized South Africa in a way that no other politician has. This has become even more true since he announced that he will lead the newly founded Knesset Party in the upcoming parliamentary elections. Zuma appeared confident on Saturday during an election campaign and set his goal of obtaining a two-thirds majority.

However, according to current polls, MK is far from that. However, the ANC leader and former state president still has many supporters, especially among the Zulu ethnic group to which he himself belongs, despite all the corruption allegations.

Zuma’s former party opposed it

The ruling African National Congress had tried several times unsuccessfully to prevent its former leader from using legal means. Among other things, the ANC wanted to ban the name of Zuma’s new party. MK means „Umkhonto we Sizwe”, translated: „Spear of the Nation”. This was the name of the armed wing of the ANC during the apartheid regime. This lawsuit was rejected, and the request not to accept the Knesset member in the parliamentary elections was rejected.

More and more allegations emerged

New accusations were made against Zuma’s party weeks ago. Among other things, MK is said to have fraudulently registered as a political party using forged signatures. There is also an issue with founder MK Jabulani Khumalo, who was allegedly expelled from the party at Zuma’s instigation and now claims Zuma’s daughter forged his resignation letter.

Even after the Constitutional Court decided not to allow Zuma to run in South Africa’s parliamentary elections, the controversial former president and his new party will continue to cause political unrest.