I don’t think the irony escaped anyone when Judge Raymond Zondo had a verbal oopsie , calling Jacob Zuma’s son ‘Duduzane Gupta’.
The Freudian slip-of-the-tongue happened last week and had the room in stitches.
Zondo is a Constitutional Court judge tasked with a critical job, so I seriously doubt it was deliberate.
But wouldn’t it be wonderful if it was; if he naughtily slipped that in there as a concise summary of the evidence he had heard up until now?
Because let’s be honest, so far it has been pretty damning for especially the Guptas and the Zumas.
The lawyers representing the Guptas and Duduzane have now asked that they be allowed to cross-examine those who testified about them.
The problem is Ajay Gupta is not prepared to testify in person, but rather via video link from Dubai, which creates an interesting problem for Judge Zondo.
Firstly, hearing from the Guptas is essential to balance out everything that’s been said about them and weigh up which versions of events are most likely.
But it’s equally essential that this be done in an environment where they are bound by the applicable laws.
If he is sitting in Dubai and testifying about his actions to a South African judge, then he could in theory refuse to answer questions, without any repercussions.
Judge Zondo would not have the legal right to force him to answer questions and he could simply get up and leave the room, if that’s what he wants to do.
I think most South Africans are rather curious to hear what the Guptas have to say.
And I think whatever they choose to say or do via video link, would also be quite telling about their guilt or innocence.
And then there’s the question of the money which they allegedly looted from our coffers and which some people reckon is in the billions of rands.
If Judge Zondo can’t compel them to return and face the music in person, will he be able to somehow have that money returned to us?
I doubt it, but maybe Duduzane Gupta can at least shed some light on which bank accounts to start looking into!