Judge questions whether Zuma’s pension can be tapped to cover R28m legal bill

The judge in Jacob Zuma's legal fees case has questioned whether it would be appropriate for the court to attach the former President's pension.

The state is fighting for Zuma to be held financially liable for his R28 million legal bill.

Reminiscent of the Economic Freedom Fighters' one-time lament that Zuma should 'pay back the money', the Presidency and State Attorney want the former ANC leader to reimburse the taxpayer.

"His question was, 'How is Mr Zuma going to live?' He is elderly. He is in his 80s," says legal journalist Karyn Maughn.

The application stems from a 2024 Supreme Court of Appeal decision, which ruled that Zuma had no right to state-funded legal fees and is required to reimburse the government.

"In 2021, the SCA endorsed a ruling that said the money must be recovered, and this case is a consequence of that," she says.

The Democratic Alliance says it wants an order that will compel the State Attorney to attach Zuma's assets, including his state pension (approximately R3 million annually), if he fails to meet he debt.

"Of course, as he does often in these scenarios, the President has pushed back at this application," notes Maughn.

She explains that Zuma is re-raising the same defences he unsuccessfully raised when the matter was beforethe High Court and the Supreme Court.

"He has said before that he would have to sell his shoes and socks to afford his legal fees, in the corruption trial. But he has actually not presented any evidence that shows, 'I'm destitute. I won't be able to meet this obligation'," says Maughn.

Zuma's lawyers have argued that he is a victim of 'unconstitutional advice' given to then-President Thabo Mbeki, which said it was lawful for the state to fund his legal fees.

"[They say] he should not be the one to suffer for it," explains Maughn.

To listen to Maughn in conversation with 702's John Perlman, use the audio player below: