South African President Jacob Zuma's woes continue to worsen. Last week, South Africa's highest court ruled he had violated the constitution. That verdict follows a series of scandals suggesting the president's judgment has been compromised by relationships with a family of South African businessmen. While the opposition has called for impeachment proceedings, Zuma continues to enjoy the confidence of the ruling African National Congress (ANC). Until he loses that backing, he will remain in power. South Africa, however, will continue to be damaged by Zuma's behavior and the allegations that swirl around him.
In 2014, the public prosecutor's office — a post-apartheid innovation that was designed to ensure independent investigations into official wrongdoing — charged the president with spending $16 million in state funds on renovations to his residence in Nkandla, about 500 km from Johannesburg. The president countered that the charges were needed to boost security at his estate and thus were legitimate state expenditures, and his allies attacked the prosecutor, alleging among other things that she was in the pay of the CIA. The National Assembly, controlled by the ANC, produced a report that exonerated Zuma.
Undaunted, the Constitutional Court ruled last week that Zuma's refusal to honor the prosecutor's order to pay a portion of the costs — for a swimming pool, cattle enclosure, chicken run, amphitheater and visitor center — constituted a failure "to uphold, defend and respect the constitution." After the verdict, Zuma went on state television, apologizing for causing "a lot of frustration and confusion," and said that he "never knowingly or deliberately set out to violate the constitution." He blamed bad legal advice and said he would pay as ordered.