Zola Majavu refuses to testify in Mapisa-Nqakula corruption trial, citing client privilege
Prominent South African lawyer Zola Majavu refused on Tuesday to take the witness stand in the corruption and money laundering trial of former defence and
Prominent South African lawyer Zola Majavu refused on Tuesday to take the witness stand in the corruption and money laundering trial of former defence and military veterans minister Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula. He said giving evidence would put him at risk of breaching attorney-client privilege.
Majavu appeared in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria with a statement already prepared. He never got to read it out. Instead, he told the court the state had put him in an “uncomfortable position” by summoning him to testify against a former client, and that answering questions could expose confidential legal dealings.
Former client, former adviser
Prosecutors tried to narrow the scope of their questions, saying they could steer clear of areas Majavu was not willing to discuss. That did not move him. Majavu held his ground and declined to testify.
The court then granted his request to be excused.
Majavu has previously represented Mapisa-Nqakula in a separate matter, and he has also acted as a legal adviser for Nombasa Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu, the military logistics contractor at the centre of the state’s case. Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu is the prosecution’s key witness.
What the trial is about
Mapisa-Nqakula faces 12 counts of corruption and one count of money laundering. Prosecutors allege she solicited and received millions of rand in cash bribes and other benefits from Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu between 2016 and 2019. The total cited in court documents and reports reaches R4.5 million.
Ntsondwa-Ndhlovu has already testified about her dealings in the case, and earlier evidence linked Majavu to the broader dispute. Her testimony placed him in the middle of a web of legal and political contacts around the alleged payments. That made his expected appearance on the stand especially sensitive.
The refusal matters because South African courts, like many around the world, regularly have to balance the public interest in hearing evidence against the duty lawyers owe to former clients. When that line blurs, trials can stall. They can also become more cautious, with judges forced to decide how far questioning can go before privilege kicks in.
For now, Majavu is out of the witness box. The trial continues with the state still trying to prove its case against one of the country’s best-known former cabinet figures, and the next rounds of testimony are likely to probe the same strained set of relationships that brought the lawyer to court in the first place.
