JACOB ZUMA, FROM THRONE TO HUMBLE PIE: THE DAY THE FORMER PRESIDENT FINALLY BOWED

MKP president Jacob Zuma.

Mpho Dube, Editor‑in‑Chief, The Azanian

The courtroom buzzed with a strange mix of tension and triumph as former President Jacob Zuma finally faced the consequences of his long‑running legal saga.

After years of defiance, political theatrics, and a relentless battle to keep the state’s purse tied to his private defence, the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria delivered a verdict that cut through the noise like a razor‑sharp blade: Zuma must repay R28.9 million in legal fees that the state had covered for his personal corruption case.

The amount, now a glaring reminder of his overreach, was ordered to be paid in full, with interest on R18.9 million running from 25 January 2024 until the debt is cleared.

Judge Anthony Millar’s ruling was unequivocal. Not only was Zuma instructed to settle the R28 960 774.34 judgment within 60 days, but failure to do so would trigger a writ of execution—allowing the State Attorney to seize his movable and immovable assets, and even a portion of his presidential pension if a court later permits it.

The court also demanded quarterly affidavits from the State Attorney, ensuring transparency on the recovery steps, and held Zuma liable for the legal costs of this very application.

For a man who once strutted the corridors of power with an aura of invincibility, this moment felt like eating humble pie. The narrative of Zuma’s fall from grace has been a public spectacle for years—from the Nkandla upgrades that cost taxpayers R246 million, to the Zondo Commission where he refused to testify, and the 15‑month prison sentence for contempt of court. Each chapter added a new layer of scandal, yet he persisted in his counter‑revolutionary stance, dismissing critics as enemies of his “cause”.

Now, the court’s gavel has forced a reckoning. In the words of a senior legal analyst, “This is more than a financial penalty; it’s a symbolic defeat. Zuma’s refusal to do the right thing finally caught up with him, and the judiciary has shown that no one—no former president, no political dynasty—is above the law.”

The public reaction is a mix of vindication and fatigue. Many South Africans see this as a small victory for accountability, a reminder that the Constitution still holds the powerful to account. Others, however, note the bitter irony: a man who once claimed to be the champion of the poor now stands stripped of the very resources he once siphoned to fund his private battles.

As the clock ticks on the 60‑day deadline, Zuma’s assets are under the microscope, and the nation watches with bated breath. Will he scramble to settle, or will the state finally execute the writ and auction his prized possessions? One thing is clear—this chapter closes a long, turbulent saga and forces a once‑untouchable leader to eat the humble pie he so long avoided.