Both the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) and President Jacob Zuma’s legal teams have conceded that the decision to withdraw criminal charges was irrational and should be set aside.
The NPA wants the court to make an order that will revert the decision to prosecute back to the director of the NPA, Shaun Abrahams to reconsider.
However, The Supreme Court of Appeal's (SCA) Justice Azhar Cachalia proposed that in order to facilitate the progression of a trial, the court may order that a new indictment be served on Zuma.
CapeTalk's Kieno Kammies speaks to Prof Stephen Tuson, Law Professor at Wits to find out what happens next.
Tuson says these back and forth court battles are a total waste of the taxpayers money.
We know that an indictment should be reinstated and be served on the President.— Prof Stephen Tuson, Law Professor at Wits
But the court said in 2014 and yesterday that there is separation of power issue. The National Director of Prosecution Authority should be independent to make his own decision and the court cannot dictate to him the time line, when to do it, how to do it or what the indictment should look like. Those are all his decisions...— Prof Stephen Tuson, Law Professor at Wits
We don't know what Shaun Abrahams is going to do, how he is going to it and when.— Prof Stephen Tuson, Law Professor at Wits
According to Tuson the court had said on Thursday that because 9 years has elapsed since the withdrawal of the charges that key evidence could be lost or key witnesses might have died...
The court implied that Abrahams has a discretion to decide whether there is merit in the charges and whether to continue with the prosecution or not.
To hear more of this interview, listen below: