Ngcobo's panel: Ramaphosa has a case to answer

President Cyril Ramaphosa has a case to answer on the charge that he may have seriously violated the law with regards to his failure to report the burglary at his Phala Phala farm two years ago and on undertaking paid work while a member of the cabinet.

This is according to the panel of legal experts, which spent six weeks investigating whether Ramaphosa has an impeachable case against him stemming from the burglary.

The panel also believes the money stolen from the farm was more than the US$580,000 disclosed by the president in his submission three weeks ago and that it doubts about the legitimacy of the source of the currency that was stolen.

LISTEN | Phala phala report and its significance

“There are weighty considerations which leave us in substantial doubt as to whether the stolen foreign currency is the proceeds of a sale,” it said in the report published on Wednesday.

Led by retired chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, the three-member panel said the enduring questions from the housebreaking and theft of foreign currency incident at Ramaphosa’s private residence of the President were:

* The source of the money stolen.

* Why was the housebreaking and theft not reported in terms of section 34 (1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (Precca) or to any other police officer for investigation?

* Why did the South African police request the Namibian police to handle the matter “with discretion?”

The panel said on the source of the foreign currency, it only had Ramaphosa’s statement, which is based on what he was told by his lodge manager, a Mr Sylvester Ndlovu, who did not confirm this information.

“It is true the president’s version is supported by the acknowledgement of receipt.”

The panel found that a number of important questions relating to the transaction remained unanswered, including that over two years later, the buffaloes were still on the farm, the general manager of the farm did not know about the money and the amount that was stolen.

“It is significant that the origin and the transaction pertaining to the the foreign currency became the subject of an investigation by the South African Reserve Bank.

“This suggests that the South African Reserve Bank had no records of this currency coming to South Africa .”

The panel said it had no information whether this investigation has been concluded, or about its outcome.

“Furthermore, the information presented to the panel establishes, prima facie, that the money that was stolen was probably more than US$ 580,000.

“As one of the suspects stated, they stole about US$800,000. Furthermore, the Namibian police reported that they had identified individuals, bank accounts in various and properties including lodges, houses and vehicles suspected to have been purchased with the proceeds of the crime.”

Ramaphosa told the panel that US$580,000 got to be kept in cushions of a sofa in a spare room of his private residence in Phala Phala, following the sale of a number of buffaloes to a Sudanese businessman in December 2019.

“The cumulative effect of all of this is that there is a substantial doubt about the legitimacy of the source of the currency that was stolen.

“This is a very serious matter, which, if established, renders the violation of section 96 of the constitution and Precca, a serious violation, and a serious misconduct.”

Apart from this, the panel said if the accusations are established that Ramaphosa was involved in the investigation by seeking “assistance in apprehending the concerned suspect” from the president of Namibia, in an investigation that yielded no prosecution or conviction and amid accusations of torture and bribery of the suspects to buy their silence, they make the violations and the misconduct involved in the charges, very serious indeed.

“Viewed as a whole, the information presented to the panel, prima facie, establishes that there was a deliberate intention not to investigate the commission of the crimes committed at Phala Phala openly.

The misconduct based on violations of the provisions of section 96(2) (b) and the violation of section 34(1) of Precca were committed to keep the investigation a secret. The request to the Namibian police to “handle the matter with discretion” confirms this intention and that the president abused his position as head of state to have the matter investigated and seeking the assistance of the Namibian president to apprehend a suspect.

 There was more foreign currency concealed in the sofa than the amount reflected in the acknowledgement of receipt. This raises the source of the additional currency.

The panel concluded that Ramaphosa may have committed a serious violation of the law and serious misconduct in terms of the constitution. 

It said in light of all the information placed before it, "we conclude that this information discloses, prima facie, that the president may have committed a serious violation of sections 96(2)(a) (of the constitution) and a serious violation of section 34(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, a serious misconduct in that the president violated section 96(2)(b) of the constitution by acting in a way that is inconsistent with his office, and a serious misconduct in that the president violated section 96(2)(b) by exposing himself to a situation involving a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private business."

 ATM leader Vuyo Zungula submitted a motion for the Assembly to initiate an inquiry into Ramaphosa’s removal on the grounds of serious violation of the constitution or the law and serious misconduct.

Zungula alleged Ramaphosa was guilty of violating the constitution, which provides that cabinet members and deputy ministers may not undertake other paid work.

Zungula added that Ramaphosa was guilty of serious violation of the Precca when he failed to report the theft on his farm to “any police official” as required by the act.

Next Tuesday, the National Assembly will debate and vote on the whether to adopt the report or not.

TimesLIVE

Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.