Zuma may be forced to pay back R29 million of taxpayer funds

The Presidency and National Treasury are moving to reclaim R28.96 million in taxpayer-funded legal fees spent on former President Jacob Zuma’s defense against corruption charges.

Accrued over nearly 15 years, the funds from the fiscus were used to defend Zuma in corruption cases linked to the controversial R30 billion 1999 Arms Deal.

The Presidency and State Attorney request an order to recover the funds, arguing that after a letter of demand was sent to Zuma for the owed payment, the former president neither responded nor paid the money.

Zuma, however, has opposed the application stating with his attorney that “no one, including the court, can believe that he will be able to pay the R28 million in his lifetime for monies that were not paid to him personally”.

The Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria is set to hear the matter on Thursday, 16 October 2025.

The case traces back to an agreement signed by then-President Thabo Mbeki, which authorised state funding for Zuma’s defense while he was Deputy President.

These payments from the taxpayer, covering 18 charges of fraud, corruption, racketeering, and money laundering, were later deemed invalid by the High Court in 2018.

Following challenges by the Democratic Alliance (DA) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), the High Court ordered a full accounting and recovery of the funds.

In April 2021, the Supreme Court of Appeal dismissed Zuma’s appeal, upholding the repayment order and imposing punitive costs for his baseless claims of judicial bias.

He was ordered him to repay the funds, which amounted to approximately R25 million at the time, which is around R30 million in 2025 terms.

Zuma’s attorneys say that he is a “victim of reckless legal advice” from Mbeki. They added that he could not repay the amount, even if his pension and benefits as a former president were attached.

The DA wants the High Court to grant an order that Zuma’s properties be attached should he fail to repay.

---

South Africa’s notorious Arms Deal

The Arms Deal, a R30 billion military procurement from European firms like Thales, remains mired in claims of kickbacks and political interference.

Broadly, the deal involved purchasing fighter jets, submarines, frigates, and helicopters from international suppliers, primarily European companies like BAE Systems, Saab, and Thales.

Within months, suspicions of bribery, conflicts of interest and procedural violations triggered official investigations.

It became a decades-long scandal due to widespread allegations of corruption, fraud, and political interference, implicating high-profile figures, including politicians, arms dealers, and intermediaries.

Convictions:

• Tony Yengeni: Convicted of fraud in 2003 for accepting a discounted luxury Mercedes-Benz from a company linked to the arms deal and for misrepresenting this to Parliament. He was sentenced to four years in prison but served only five months, released on parole in January 2007.

• Schabir Shaik: Convicted in 2005 of fraud and corruption, including soliciting a bribe from Thales on behalf of close associate, deputy president Zuma, related to the same arms deal. He received a 15-year sentence but was released on medical parole in March 2009 after serving about two and a half years, citing terminal illness.

International and local probes:

• BAE Systems paid ~$450 million in 2010 to settle US and UK investigations into false accounting and illicit payments linked to global arms deals, including South Africa’s.

• Saab admitted in 2011 that ~R24 million was paid via BAE Systems to a consultant to secure South African fighter jet contracts.

---

Zuma’s alleged role

The former president, now leader of the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP), is accused of, among other things, attempting to receive bribes through Shaik to shield Thales from investigation.

First charged in 2005, Zuma avoided trial for years through legal challenges and political backing within the majority ANC.

On April 28, 2016, the Supreme Court of Appeals reinstated corruption charges against Zuma, ruling the decision to drop them irrational.

They said that dropping the charges in 2009, the year Zuma was inaugurated as President, was “irrational.”

It reinstated the counts of corruption, fraud, racketeering, and money laundering, tied to 783 alleged illegal payments

Timeline highlights:

• 2005: Zuma first charged
• 2009: Charges dropped
• 2016: High Court orders reinstatement
• 2018: Zuma charged again, two months after resigning as president.

Zuma’s criminal trial in this matter has faced two decades of delays, with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) accusing him of “serial abuse” of court processes through repeated appeals.

The NPA, while not directly involved in this civil matter relating to legal fees, said that it is pressing ahead with Zuma’s criminal trial.

It recently urged the KwaZulu-Natal High Court to proceed despite his latest appeals, including bids to disqualify lead prosecutor Billy Downer.

The agency argues that further delays undermine public interest in resolving a case that has cost taxpayers millions and exposed systemic corruption.