The Rep

So, Phala Phala ...

- PHUMELELE P HLATI Phumelele P Hlati

Every few years there is an event that threatens to derail an ANC president and the president of the country.

For Jacob Zuma it was the Nkandla matter and a few others too, and with the present one it is Phala Phala.

Since the leaked report on Wednesday night, many people have scrambled to offer their opinions about what should happen to Cyril Ramaphosa and many of those who have offered their wellthough­t out suggestion­s and opinions only read the four lines of recommenda­tions.

By the time you read this, the NEC of the ANC would have met and a statement issued so I will not try to second guess what they might have said since my column was written yesterday morning.

The panel led by retired chief justice Sandile Ngcobo made their recommenda­tions and their findings about what they think might have happened on that fateful day in Phala Phala and the steps that “may have” been taken by Ramaphosa after he was alerted to the theft.

The panel believes that Ramaphosa “may have” violated sections of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act ... you read the report, I hope, so I will not repeat what was said.

Let us see exactly what the president “may have” been guilty of. Sections 96(2) a and b say: “Members of the cabinet and deputy ministers may not (a) undertake any other paid work; (b) act in any way that is inconsiste­nt with their office, or expose themselves to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between theiroffic­ial responsibi­lities and private interests.”

If you read these sections and the statements by the panel about their limited scope and access to witnesses you will see why they purposely used the term “may have”.

Their recommenda­tions are based on first impression­s of the evidence presented to them and they did no other independen­t verificati­on of such evidence since it was never their mandate to do so.

Basically, they are saying it appears Cyril has a case to answer concerning those with the power to investigat­e, call witnesses and gather evidence.

So in reality, what does this mean for the political career of Ramaphosa, his prospects in the December national conference, his continued stint as state president and generally his fate as a free man?

Legally it means nothing, but politicall­y it opens up many avenues for opponents to attack him and possibly force him to resign as ANC president, as state president and disqualify himself as the candidate in December. What we are seeing is a bitter fight for the right to lead the ANC and possibly the country and then gain control of the huge patronage network this position offers the incumbent.

This is and was never about the welfare of you and me and that of the country. We as the general public should avoid at all cost in being dragged into the vortex and toxic political environmen­t of the ANC.

Ours is to observe what the law says and support whatever measures are taken to uphold the law and protect the constituti­on. Let us watch them tear themselves apart and wait for our say in 2024 as allowed by the constituti­on. Infuriatin­gly, our fate is in the hands of such people.

 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa