The National Director of Public Prosecutions had a duty to protect the integrity of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) against internal abuse. The NPA made this submission in its application for leave to appeal against the judgment of the full bench of the high court last month.The high court set aside the 2009 decision by Acting NDPP Mokotedi Mpshe to discontinue the prosecution of President Jacob Zuma.Mpshe dropped the 783 counts of racketeering and corruption against Zuma because he believed Scorpions boss Leonard McCarthy had manipulated the timing of when to serve the indictment against Zuma in December 2007.The NPA‚ in its application on Monday‚ said the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP) was vested with a discretion which was his alone to exercise provided he was not acting in bad faith.“Even if his decision is not one which some someone else or the court would have taken‚ and even if it was unreasonable‚ it is not a basis to set it aside‚” the papers by NPA’s counsel Hilton Epstein SC‚ Hamilton Maenetje SC and Anthea Platt read.They said Mpshe‚ as the Acting NDPP‚ had the power to discontinue the prosecution and the court erred in finding that he did not have the power.“His decision was indeed rationally related to the purpose for which the power was conferred.”They said the high court should have found that the prosecutorial process was tainted and that it was not irrational to decide to discontinue the prosecution.They also said the court erred in stating that Zuma should face the charges as outlined in the indictment.“This finding is an inappropriate transgression of the separation-of-powers doctrine.“The doctrine precludes the courts from impermissibly assuming the functions that fall within the domain of the executive.”They said in terms of the Constitution‚ the NDPP was the authority mandated to prosecute crime.They said the purpose of that power was to guard against manipulation‚ and ensure that all persons who were the subject of a prosecution were dealt with in a manner which was fair.They said the NDPP’s duty was to protect the institutional integrity of the NPA.“It is he that is best positioned to weigh the seriousness of abuse within his own hierarchy.”They said as a matter of logic‚ there seemed to be no reason why the head of the prosecuting service might not take it upon himself to determine that the abuse was so egregious as to warrant discontinuation‚ even in the absence of a direct causal link between the abuse and prospects of a fair trial.“It is emphasised that in the present case the senior management of the NPA formed the view that it was not in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution in the light of the conduct of McCarthy.”They said it would be artificial and make no sense for the prosecutor who had formed the view that the prosecution should not be proceeded with‚ to wait for the accused to bring an application to stay the prosecution and to then agree.“There is considerable public interest in this matter. The issues in this application are of great constitutional import.TMG Digital..