Judge Raymond Zondo on Thursday dismissed the application brought by former president Jacob Zuma for his recusal from hearing his eventual testimony before the state capture commission.

“I am satisfied that the applicant’s application has no merit,” is how Zondo concluded his ruling after more than 50 minutes.

Zondo said Zuma had failed to meet the test for a reasonable apprehension of bias, after faulting the manner in which the test had been interpreted by the former president’s lawyer, Muzi Sikhakhane.

Sikhakhane immediately responded to the ruling by saying he and Zuma would leave the proceedings, would take the ruling on review and would furthermore lodge a complaint against Zondo with the Judicial Services Commission.

The last would take the form of accusing Zondo, the deputy chief justice, of ruling on “disputes that involve yourself”.

The commission’s evidence leader, advocate Paul Pretorius, called the move by Zuma and his counsel to leave the proceedings out of order.

He pointed out that the summons issued by Zuma on October 9 to appear before the commission stood.

“The applicant would be acting in defiance and unlawfully. It is up to you to decide whether the proceedings will continue or whether they will be stayed pending any application for a review,” Pretorius said

“It is not open to the applicant to simply excuse himself.”

Zondo then adjourned the commission for a tea break after Zuma and Sikhakhane’s exit.

In his ruling, he rejected their contention that he had compromised himself by asking questions of witnesses, including former ministers and members of Parliament (MPs), that led Zuma to fear he was favouring a particular version of events.

“I do not agree. I am entitled and sometimes obliged, even a judge in a court of law is entitled to seek clarifications.”

Zuma could not expect him to remain passive when witnesses gave evidence and he believed he had struck the right balance in his approach, he said.

He also dismissed Sikhakhane’s submission that the selection of witnesses in itself had suggested bias.

“The commission was free to use whatever witnesses were available as long as in the end the applicant himself was given an opportunity to come before the commission,” he said.

Sikhakhane had argued this week that Zondo’s conduct had given the former president reason to believe that he was persecuted and that the commission had reached a foregone conclusion, like much of the public, that he was person who “broke” South Africa.

Zondo countered that he had gone to great lengths to bring Zuma to recount his version of events to the commission so that it could make a fair finding.

He had summonsed Zuma to testify over a period of five days.

Pretorius had argued that if the judge were to recuse himself it would lead to the collapse of the commission that has until March next year to probe a web of rent-seeking scandals that bled the public purse of billions of rand.