So DCJ Zondo is accused of being a witness and judge in his own cause. Let's explore this allegation. Prof Mosala opposed the recusal application as secretary, however he could not speak to the alleged personal relationship between Zuma and DCJ Zondo.

The rules of evidence in an application are that an allegation that is undisputed is accepted as evidence. Prof Mosala had no personal knowledge of the alleged personal relationship between Zuma and DCJ Zondo, hence ge could not dispute same.

It then became necessary for DCJ Zondo to issue the statement so as to dispute Zuma's version. In any event, there is precedent that was quoted by the DCJ to support his statement.

Therefore the assertion that DCJ was a witness is opportunistic because had the personal relationship allegations been undisputed, they would have ultimately swayed the ruling to Zuma's favor.

A Judge being a witness in his own cause is not unusual, one can think of a case of contempt in facie curiae. In such case a judge is prosecutor, witness and judge simultaneously. The DCJ being witness as ground for review is totally nonsensical.