Cyril Ramaphosa’s worst nightmare
• Handover of experts’ report on Phala Phala a spanner in the works for re-election prospects
President Cyril Ramaphosa has a prima facie case to answer on Phala Phala business affairs, a report of the expert panel chaired by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo submitted to parliament said on Wednesday.
The decision means Ramaphosa could face an impeachment process. It also throws a spanner in the works for his prospects for re-election as ANC president when the party convenes for its elective conference in two weeks.
The panel found the president may have committed serious violations of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act and the constitution “by exposing himself to a situation involving a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private business”.
It is likely that the president will be advised to take the report on review.
The three-member panel, which included retired judge Thokozile Masipa and advocate Mahlape Sello, was appointed by National Assembly speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula in September to make a determination on whether Ramaphosa has a case to answer on the Phala Phala scandal.
“We think that the president has a case to answer on the origin of the foreign currency that was stolen, as well as the underlying transaction for it,” said the report by the panel.
“There are weighty considerations which leave us in substantial doubt as to whether the stolen foreign currency is the proceeds of sale.
“This is a very serious violation which if established renders the violation [of] section 96 of the constitution and the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, a serious violation and a
serious misconduct,” it said.
The ANC top six officials were in meetings at the time of publication.
In a statement late on Wednesday night, the presidency said it had noted the report and “the National Assembly needs to consider it and determine the most appropriate way forward”.
It described the report as “an extraordinary moment for SA’s constitutional democracy”.
In the statement Ramaphosa again said: “I categorically deny that I am guilty of any of the allegations against me.”
Council for the Advancement of the SA Constitution executive secretary Lawson Naidoo said on Wednesday the panel’s findings were serious.
“It’s a serious finding that sufficient evidence exists on various ‘charges’ and the National Assembly cannot surely ignore or second-guess these findings,” Naidoo said.
“It is imperative that a formal section 89 ‘impeachment’ inquiry be instituted to fully investigate the complaint and reach a final conclusion, noting that law enforcement agencies are also still seized with the matter,” he said.
Millions in foreign currency were allegedly stolen and the crime allegedly kept under wraps.
Mapisa-Nqakula set up the panel after an opposition party, the African Transformation Movement, filed a motion in June requesting the house to initiate an inquiry into Ramaphosa’s removal from the office as provided for by section 89 of the constitution.
That section provides for the National Assembly to remove a president from office on the grounds of a serious violation of the constitution or the law, serious misconduct and an inability to perform the functions of office. A two-thirds majority in the house is required to impeach the president.
The party charged he violated the constitution, which prohibits members of the cabinet and deputy ministers from “undertaking any other paid work”, among other things.
It also suggested Ramaphosa tried to cover up the robbery as he did not report it to the police, as required by law.
Ramaphosa’s official version of the events emerged for the first time on Wednesday, with him stating in his statement submitted to the panel that the foreign currency stolen from his Phala Phala farm in late 2020 came from the sale of 20 buffalo to a Sudanese business person.
In the documents submitted to the panel, Ramaphosa suggests the amount stolen from Phala Phala was $580,000 — far less than the $4m reported when the saga first erupted. He says the money came from the sale of 20 buffalo to Mustafa Mohamed Ibrahim Hazim, a citizen of Sudan who purchased the animals for cash on Christmas Day in 2020.
The documents claim lodge manager Sylvester Ndlovu accepted the money from Hazim and initially stored it in a safe at a conference centre on the farm. However, fearing that other workers had access to the safe he moved the money to Ramaphosa’s private residence on the property.
“He stored the money below cushions of a sofa in a spare bedroom that is hardly ever used, inside my private residence,” Ramaphosa says in his submission, which states he learnt of the buffalo sale only on December 26, when he arrived at Phala Phala. “He thought it was the safest place, as he believed nobody would break into the president’s house.”
Ramaphosa also denied the first of the four charges he faces: an allegation that he was undertaking paid work by running Phala Phala as a business in violation of the constitution. The Executive Members Ethics Act requires that members of the executive do not receive payment for work outside their state roles, which is why Ramaphosa put his business interests in a blind trust when he became president in 2014.
“I do not perform paid work for Ntaba Nyoni [the legal entity that operates as Phala Phala Wildlife],” Ramaphosa said. “I am not on any payroll other than that of the presidency.”
Ramaphosa also denied the second charge against him that he violated the law by reporting the Phala Phala robbery to the head of his VIP protection unit, Maj-Gen Wally Rhoode, instead of to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (the Hawks). The president claims that he complied with the law by reporting the theft to the head of his protection unit, which falls under the SA Police Service (SAPS), and that he was not in control of what transpired afterwards.
On the third charge, which alleges Ramaphosa is guilty of serious misconduct for involving Rhoode in the investigation, he reiterated that this was in accordance with the law, given that the Presidential Protection Service falls under SAPS.
The fourth charge faced by Ramaphosa also accuses him of serious misconduct for allegedly giving unlawful instructions to Rhoode to investigate a burglary at a private residence.
“I requested Maj-Gen Rhoode to attend to this incident insofar as it was within his roles and responsibilities to do so,” said Ramaphosa. “Rhoode subsequently told me that he had been instructed by the then deputy national commissioner of police, Lt-Gen Mfazi, to conduct a preliminary inquiry with a focus on my safety and threats to me, and thereafter to report back to him.”
The National Assembly is set to debate the report on December 6, just 10 days before the ANC’s 55th elective conference.
THE PRESIDENCY DESCRIBED THE REPORT AS ‘AN EXTRAORDINARY MOMENT FOR SA’S CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY’