Zuma's legal bill nightmare

The former president is ordered to pay back the money as the tide turns

- Marlan Padayachee

Out of bounds to the sheriff: If Jacob Zuma fails to pay the R28,9 million, the state can attach his movable and immovable property but not Nkandla as it is on protected tribal land.

(Photo: Delwyn Verasamy)

he Man from Nkandla: Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma — a name that carries weight, history and a peculiar mix of revolution, reverence and revulsion in South Africa.

His middle name, Gedleyihlekisa, resonates in Zulu with a powerful cultural warning — translated loosely, it means “the one who smiles while causing you harm” — or perhaps on the flipside of the coin, “the one who laughs while deceiving you”. For a nation still grappling with the consequences of his political career, the meaning seems almost prophetic.

Zuma, a polarising love-hate political figure and liberation hero, rose through the ANC ranks, was jailed on Robben Island and exiled, eventually becoming president in 2009.

After nine turbulent years in office, he fell dramatically from grace, leaving behind a legacy riddled with controversy and a trail of legal battles that continue to this day. Reinventing himself in recent years with his self-styled uMkhonto weSizwe party, Zuma remains a figure revered by loyalists and reviled by critics.

For more than two decades, the courts have been Zuma’s second battlefield. His legal strategy — repeatedly filing applications, seeking recusals and delaying proceedings — is known as the “Stalingrad defence”, a term borrowed from the protracted World War II battle.

Zuma has tested the patience of the judiciary, turning each legal appearance into a saga that sometimes seemed more political theatre than a judicial process, while chuckling at us with his trademark grin.