The Stalingrad legal defense is a strategy usually used by a defendant to wear down the plaintiff or legal proceedings by appealing every ruling that is unfavorable to the defendant and using whatever other means possible to delay proceedings. Typically a meritorious case is not presented by the defendant.[1][2] The term comes from the World War II era Battle of Stalingrad[1] where the Soviet Union won the battle by wearing down attacking German forces over the course of 5 months.

A notable use of this legal defense strategy was by former South African president Jacob Zuma in attempting to avoid giving testimony before the Zondo Commission into state corruption. Zuma used a number of legal challenges, medical delays, private prosecutions,[3] and other means to attempt to cause the commission to run out of time before he would have to appear before it.[4][5]

References

  1. ^ a b "Stalingrad Defense Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc". definitions.uslegal.com. Retrieved November 27, 2020.
  2. ^ "Using Stalingrad Tactics To Delay Justice". Judges Matter. June 19, 2018. Retrieved November 27, 2020.
  3. ^ Thamm, Marianne (September 22, 2022). "AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY ANALYSIS : Zuma's still-mysterious 'medical condition' weaponised to prosecute journalist accused of disclosing it". Daily Maverick. Retrieved October 2, 2022.
  4. ^ Corcoran, Bill. "Zuma employing 'Stalingrad defence' as legal stalling strategy". The Irish Times. Retrieved November 27, 2020.
  5. ^ Powell, Cathleen. "South African judge has refused to step down from corruption probe: this was the right call". The Conversation. Retrieved November 27, 2020.
Categories