In a landmark ruling that closes a long-standing chapter in South Africa’s political and legal history, the Pretoria High Court has ordered former president Jacob Zuma to repay R28.9 million that the state spent on his legal defence in his protracted corruption trial.
The ruling stems from a long-running dispute over who should bear the costs of Zuma’s defence in his corruption, fraud, and money-laundering case linked to the multibillion-rand arms deal of the late 1990s. Zuma, who served as president from 2009 to 2018, had his legal fees covered by the state under a 2006 agreement reached during his tenure as deputy president.
The High Court agreed, ruling that the expenditure amounted to an abuse of public funds. The court further ordered that the repayment be made within a specified period, failing which the State Attorney may initiate recovery proceedings against Zuma’s assets.
The Office of the State Attorney welcomed the ruling, saying it affirmed the principle that public office bearers must be held financially accountable for personal legal matters.
Zuma’s legal team has indicated that they will appeal the ruling, arguing that the former president was entitled to state support due to the nature of the charges, which they claim arose “in the course and scope” of his duties as a government official.
Political analysts say the decision could have broader implications for how future administrations handle legal funding for public officials facing criminal charges.
The National Treasury is expected to issue a formal notice to Zuma’s legal representatives outlining repayment terms in the coming days. If Zuma fails to comply, the state could move to attach his assets to recover the R28.9 million.
The ruling has been widely welcomed by accountability advocates, who have long criticized the misuse of state funds for personal legal battles, describing it as a victory for transparency and justice in South Africa’s democracy.