The State v Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma and Thales South Africa (Pty) Ltd

This is a criminal prosecution against two accused persons: Jacob Gedleyihlekisa Zuma (first accused) and Thales South Africa (Pty) Ltd (second accused). The matter came before the KwaZulu-Natal High Court in Pietermaritzburg for procedural directions. The first accused had filed a special plea in terms of section 106(1)(h) and (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and there was also an application for leave to supplement certain documents. The matter required adjournment for the hearing of the special plea and potentially an application for further postponement.

• Whether the matter should be adjourned for the hearing of the first accused's special plea in terms of section 106(1)(h) and (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act
• The procedural arrangements for filing of answering and replying affidavits in respect of the application for leave to supplement
• Whether the representative of the second accused should be excused from attendance at the scheduled hearing

The Court ordered by consent that: (1) The matter is adjourned to 10h00 on 21 and 22 September 2021 in open court in Pietermaritzburg for the hearing of the first accused's special plea in terms of section 106(1)(h) and (4) and any application for further postponement; (2) The State shall deliver its answering affidavit on or before 16 September 2021; (3) The first accused shall deliver his replying affidavit, if any, on or before 13h00 on 20 September 2021; (4) The representative of the second accused is excused from attendance at the hearing on 21 and 22 September 2021.

This is a procedural order made by consent and does not establish any binding legal principle. It is an interlocutory order dealing with case management and procedural directions only.

None. This is a brief consent order dealing purely with procedural matters without any judicial reasoning, commentary, or observations by the court.

This is a procedural interlocutory order in what is a high-profile criminal prosecution involving a former President of South Africa and a multinational corporation. The order itself establishes no legal precedent but forms part of the procedural history of the well-known arms deal prosecution. The case has broader significance in South African legal and political history as it relates to allegations of corruption in the strategic defence procurement package (arms deal) of the late 1990s.