Advocate Albert Murphy Gives Zuma And Malema The Middle Finger – See Why

Advertisement

A little-known South African man stirred the internet in the early hours of today when he launched a scathing attack on President Jacob Zuma and EFF leader Julius Malema.

The man who goes by the name Advocate Albert Murphy wrote on Twitter that he has the desire to speak with President Jacob Zuma and Malema but has no words to express himself.

Read Also: NPA Moves To Concourt In A Bid To Bury Zuma’s 738 Corruption Charges

Regardless of that, Murphy said he finally resolved to speak to the political leaders with his middle finger, stating that his middle finger conveys his words.

He wrote: “I have a desire to send both Zuma and Malema a message but I’m lost for words. As they say, a picture is worth more than a thousand words”

Murphy’s post didn’t go down well with Malema’s fans who slammed him for fuelling violence in an already riotous country.

 

The advocate, who claimed to be a Christian appeared to have been angry that the 783 charges against President Zuma was squashed.



This was apparent by the way he replied Malema’s fan who tried to scold him for the post.

“If the president acts like one [a president], we can respect him. Let him face the 783 charges of corruption against him then we talk again,” he replied another Twitter user.

On a lighter note, the advocate claimed that he grew up with South Africa’s last apartheid president FW de Klerk after some Twitter users pointed out that they have a striking resemblance.

“No Thulani I’m not related to FW de Klerk but we grew up in the same town and went to the same school. Maybe its [sic] the water,” he wrote.

Recall that South Africa’s National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) decided, on 23 May, not to reinstate nearly 800 corruption charges counts of alleged corruption, fraud, and racketeering against President Jacob Zuma which were dropped in 2009.

The case against Mr Zuma stems from his time as deputy president between 1999 and 2005. During this period, he allegedly received an annual bribe of £40,000 from the local subsidiary of a French defence company in return for shielding it from an official investigation into the arms deal.

He was also accused of accepting payments totalling £280,000 from Schabir Shaik, a businessman who then acted as his financial adviser. Mr Zuma allegedly used his influence to give Shaik contracts and favours

In 2016, however, a full bench of the High Court in Pretoria reinstated the 783 charges. The Court ordered that the decision to discontinue the prosecution against Zuma’s 783 corruption charges must be discarded.

“The decision to drop the case had been “inexplicable” and “irrational,” added Mr Justice Ledwaba. “Mr. Zuma should face the charges as outlined in the indictment,” Justice Aubrey Ledwaba ruled.

Although Zuma has always protested his innocence, if the DA wins him in court, the president would face a long prison term.

The EFF, Zuma’s critics and the likes of advocate Albert Murphy still want the president to face the charges again.

Topics: