Shaun Abrahams must be axed for protecting corrupt cronies

About this Article

I have today written to President Jacob Zuma, calling on him to immediately suspend the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), Adv Shaun Abrahams, in line with Section 12(6) of the NPA Act, pending an enquiry into his fitness to hold office.

Since his appointment in 2015, Abrahams has overseen the complete politicisation of the National Prosecuting Authority, whereby an entrenched culture of selective prosecution has seen looting and theft of public money on a scale never seen before.

Instead of ensuring the law applies equally to everyone, Abrahams has safeguarded certain individuals from prosecution and from facing the full might of the law. His complete silence and lack of action regarding clear acts of grand corruption and state capture by a small political elite – spearheaded by the Guptas – shows he is both unfit and unable to hold the office of NDPP.

Earlier this year, I laid an array of criminal charges against those who have captured our state and stolen public money, including Atul Gupta, Ajay Gupta, Rajesh Gupta, Ashu Chawla, Nazeem Howa, Mosebenzi Zwane, Malusi Gigaba, Faith Muthambi, Des van Rooyen, Duduzane Zuma and Matshela Koko.

Since then, there has been no further action, investigation, or condemnation by Adv Abrahams nor his office. In any other functioning democracy, the allegations emanating from the leaked Gupta emails would be subject to immediate investigation. However, it appear Abrahams is hell-bent on protecting the corrupt and the connected.

We believe that our country cannot go on with a protector of criminals heading our prosecuting authority.

In addition to this, Abrahams has refused to take a decision on whether or not to prosecute President Zuma himself. In March 2014 – over 1200 days ago – I laid 8 charges of corruption against the President for his role in using the people’s money to build his Nkandla mansion.I received confirmation that the investigation into these charges “has been concluded”, and that “case docket was handed into the office of the NDPP Mr Shaun Abrahams on 21 August 2015, for a decision whether to prosecute, or not to prosecute.”

Since August 2015, this simple decision has been completely avoided. I have since written to Adv. Abrahams requesting a meeting on this matter. He flatly ignored my request.

Abrahams also instituted what were clearly politically motivated charges against former Finance Minister, Pravin Gordhan, wiping billions of rands off of our economy in the process.  Moreover, Abrahams’ very first act as NDPP was to drop charges against the compromised former acting NDPP, Nomgcobo Jiba, and to instead promote her. Jiba had amongst other things interfered in the Selebi prosecution and had asked the president to expunge the criminal record of her husband, Booker Nhantsi, who had stolen trust funds from clients at his legal practice.

Section 32 (1)(a) of the NPA Act states that a “member of the prosecuting authority shall serve impartially and exercise, carry out or perform his or her powers, duties and functions in good faith and without fear, favour or prejudice and subject only to the Constitution and the law”.

It is clear to anyone that Adv. Abrahams has failed this requirement – numerous times – and must be suspended pending a full parliamentary enquiry into his fitness to hold office in line with section 12(6) of the NPA Act.

I trust the President will act without delay in suspending Adv. Abrahams to restore the integrity of our prosecuting authority.

Be a part of CHANGE. It’s time to unite!

In 2019, we have an opportunity to bring the change that South Africa so desperately needs, but to do it, we need your help.


2 Responses to Shaun Abrahams must be axed for protecting corrupt cronies

  1. Peter Michael Staffen July 11, 2017 at 12:02 pm #

    and nothing will happen as he is captured if he does not want to prosecute go to the courts or to the bulldog

  2. Tobie van Rhyn July 11, 2017 at 5:19 pm #

    Is this not something that the courts can decide? I realise the seperation of powers, but is there no technicality that can be used in this matter?

Leave a Reply