Zuma reaffirms plan to challenge May elections in international court

uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) political party leader, former President Jacob Zuma, has doubled down on claims that cast doubts on the 2024 May polls.

Zuma insists that the party will approach the international court for recourse. But is this possible?

The MK Party is again looking to challenge the electoral outcome of the 2024 national and provincial elections.

This follows two failed bids to challenge the May polls in the Electoral Court, which the party withdrew, and also in the Constitutional Court, where they sought to interdict the first sitting of the National Assembly.

Both attempts failed due to among other things, a lack of evidence to support the allegations.

Zuma continues to cast aspersions on the credibility of the critical general election results by alleging that the newly formed party was “robbed” of votes.

“What are we supposed to do? Because our votes were stolen. They have now gathered with their own partners (GNU). What has happened, I think our ancestors are very furious over what happened.”

There is now a pending fresh application, which is yet to be determined by a court of law.

Zuma, who first spoke of approaching an international court over the issue in June this year, repeated the threat in December at the MK Party’s gala dinner.

“If the judges in South Africa don’t respect the law, my view is that we should go to the International Court where the law will be exercised. It is not a small matter to steal the votes of those who have won, it is not a small matter. It is a matter, if it comes to push, I will sell all my cattle in order to get the money to go there.”

The Constitutional Court is the highest court in South Africa.

In addition, the only applicable courts in this instance are the African Court on Human and People’s Rights, the International Criminal Court or the International Court of Justice.

The next question that should follow is what is the jurisdiction of these courts and could a claim of this nature head to the said courts?

On the ICJ, only States are eligible to appear before the court in contentious cases. The Court has no jurisdiction to deal with applications from individuals, non-governmental organisations, corporations or any other private entity.

The ICC, on the other hand, has jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole, namely genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

If one turns to the courts in the continent, International law expert, Patrick Lukusa Kadima, is of the view that this claim to approach the international court does not hold water.

“The next question is do we have an international court or regional court in Africa that could hear the matter on voting. In terms of Southern Africa, there is absolutely nothing of that sort that the former president can use. Because the SADC tribunal is no more and it was dissolved during his time as Head of State with other member states. So, the SADC tribunal does not exist anymore. He cannot go to the East African Court of Justice because there is no jurisdiction, that is for East African Community members, even the ECOWAS court belongs to the West African community members. So, the African Court on Human and People’s Rights does not absolutely have jurisdiction to also hear that because its contentious jurisdiction only applies to cases and disputes that are submitted to the court in respect of the interpretation and the application of the African Charter of human and people’s rights.”