Letter to the Star on 6^th April 2009,  published in ‘soft version' on 8^th April.

The  'No-Prosecution of ZUMA'  decision by the NPA is as obviously a politically inspired decision as was the original decision to prosecute him. The reasons given for the 'No-Prosecution' have no bearing whatsoever on the merits of the case against him, but only reflect on the lack of independence of the NPA in their decision making on who to charge with crimes and who not to charge. For the NPA to now decide that it does not have a 'winnable case' after years of thinking otherwise, and bearing in mind the weight of the evidence in the Shabir Shaik trial, has a strong whiff of non-professional conduct.

However, it is not all smelling of last year's easter eggs. If one takes a cricketting view, where umpires seem to have no qualms about balancing an early unfortunate very bad decision with a later unfortunate very bad decision, thus hoping to reignite the contest between the teams (take Gibbs not out on 9 and AB out on 0 in the first ODI against Australia), then all is almost well. After all, according to a generally held view, there havn't been many clean vests in government now for decades (remember Moss Gas, Agricultural Boards?).  So, one can argue, why disbar Jacob Zuma from the highest office, when the alternative occupant could just as easily also sit in court on similar charges? And at least Zuma has shown qualities of leadership which have elevated him to the highest point above his colleagues.

Which leaves the true democrats among us, the idealists and perfectionists and theorists, high and dry. It is galling to discover that the next president is someone tainted with a generally corrupt relationship to a financial advisor, someone abhorred by Bishop Tutu, someone who can make sweet overtures to afrikaner farmers while quietly allowing Mugabe to go his merry way in Zimbabwe. But in reality, what else is there! And lest you think this is an advertorial for anti-depressants, there is a flip side to the awful coin.

There is a very good chance of Mr Zuma actually clamping down on bribery, fraud, nepotism, cronyism, corruption, money- and time wasting in government, because with his 30 visits to court in the last 7 years he has been exposed to a different, quite unusual, view of some of these issues. As a realist, I believe one should lay the infamous arms deal to rest, give Mr Zuma a chance, and hope for the best.