PRETORIA, South Africa- A judge presiding over the case in which the state seeks repayment of R28 million in taxpayer-funded legal fees has raised concerns about whether former President Jacob Zuma’s pension can be attached to satisfy the debt.
The Pretoria High Court is hearing an application brought by the Presidency, the State Attorney and the Democratic Alliance, which seeks to hold Zuma financially liable for the legal fees that were paid on his behalf in various corruption and arms-deal related proceedings. The claim is grounded in a 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that declared state funding of his defence unlawful and ordered Zuma to repay the funds.
During proceedings, the judge expressed hesitation about granting an order to seize Zuma’s pension. “How is Mr Zuma going to live? He is elderly,” the judge asked, noting that the pension constitutes a primary source of livelihood for a man in his 80s. Zuma’s pension is reported to amount to around R3 million annually.
Legal commentators say Zuma has revived arguments previously rejected in lower courts: that he cannot repay the debt without being left destitute, and that the obligation to repay should rest with state officials who provided what they now concede was unlawful funding. His defence contends that he was misled by unconstitutional legal advice given to former President Thabo Mbeki, and that Zuma should not be penalised for following that advice.
The Democratic Alliance, acting as a co-applicant, has asked the court to be empowered to attach other Zuma assets should the pension attachment prove insufficient. The judge, however, warned that the court must balance the state’s interest in recovery with constitutional protections against impoverishing an individual who must still live and support dependants.
Judgment has been reserved. The court’s decision will clarify whether attaching pension benefits is constitutionally and practically viable or whether alternative enforcement mechanisms must be adopted.
