Public protector finds in Cyril Ramaphosa's favour in Phala Phala preliminary report

There is no basis to conclude that President Cyril Ramaphosa contravened the Executive Ethic Code in the manner in which he handled the housebreaking at his Phala Phala farm when US foreign currency stashed in a sofa was stolen in 2020. 

This is according to acting public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka’s preliminary report on the Phala Phala farm scandal.  

The almost 200-page report, which TimesLIVE has seen, investigated Ramaphosa’s handling of the robbery and those who were involved. Opposition parties had asked her to investigate whether Ramaphosa violated the Executive Ethics Code after the robbery. 

Gcaleka’s investigation found the allegation that Ramaphosa exposed himself to any risk of a conflict between his constitutional duties and obligations and his private interests arising from or affected by his alleged paid work at Phala Phala “is not substantiated”. 

Her investigation revealed that Phala Phala farm is managed by Ntaba Nyoni Close Corporation on land owned and registered under the Tshivhase Trust.  

Evidence and information before Gcaleka indicated that US dollars stolen at Phala Phala farm on or about February 9 2020, emanated from a private cash transaction between private persons. 

On December 23 2019 Sudanese businessman Mustafa Mohamed Ibrahim Hazim arrived at the farm and purchased buffalo on December 25.  

An amount of US$580,000 (about R10.6m) was received by Ntaba Nyoni employee Sylvester Ndlovu on the same day and a cash payment receipt issued as proof of the transaction to Hazim.  

From the evidence before her, Gcaleka said it is apparent Ramaphosa was not at the farm during this transaction and did not play a role in the sale. 

Investigators visited secretary of cabinet Phindile Baleni on October 7 2022 to inspect Ramaphosa’s register of financial interests to obtain more information on the declaration relating to the financial year 2019/2020. 

The team found that Ramaphosa declared that he received no remuneration other than as a member of the executive during that reporting period for 2019/2020.  

Ramaphosa indicated further he had instructed Steyn Speed in his office to ensure compliance with the code.  

After the inspection Gcaleka established that Ramaphosa retained a financial interest in the form of a member’s interest at Ntaba Nyoni.  

Her investigation could not find evidence Ramaphosa was actively involved in any day-to-day activities or operations of Ntaba Nyoni or his Phala Phala farm.

Evidence proved that the daily management of the farm was the responsibility of Hendrik von Wielligh as the general manager with the help of about 40 employees. Therefore the allegation that Ramaphosa had a financial interest in game and cattle farming was not supported by evidence. 

Ramaphosa was also not exposed to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between his official duties as president and his private interests.  

Gcaleka's probe could not find evidence to support the allegation that Ramaphosa received remuneration or undertook paid work at the farm while in office.  

She found there was a difference between financial interests in a business and working for and receiving a salary from that business.  

On the allegation that Ramaphosa failed to report the crime and abused his power using state resources in the form of getting the Presidential Protection Services' Maj-Gen Wally Rhoode deployed at the farm to investigate the crime, Gcaleka found that this too was unsubstantiated.  

There was no evidence to support there was an intention to conceal the crime and abuse of power as well as state resources.  

Gcaleka concluded that Ramaphosa followed the proper channels when he reported the robbery and that the deployment of PPS officers at Ramaphosa’s private residence did not amount to an abuse of power.  

Measuring this with the standards of the Executive Ethics Code, Gcaleka could not conclude that Ramaphosa acted improperly.  

On the allegation that Rhoode acted improperly by investigating the crime, evidence before Gcaleka revealed that Rhoode did not inform his commanding officer about the crime.  

Instead, Rhoode alleged he reported the crime to the late Lt-Gen Sindile Mfazi, then national head of the SAPS crime detection service.  

Gcaleka was not provided with proof by Rhoode to support his version and no case docket was opened with the SAPS.  

There is no trace of the case on the SAPS’ Crime Statistics Report for the financial year 2019/2020. 

Gcaleka concluded that Rhoode assembled his investigation team and later engaged in an unofficial criminal investigation, which included interviewing suspects, witnesses, conducting surveillance, travelling to Cape Town to trace suspects, collecting evidence and compiling a report in connection with the crime of housebreaking with the intent to steal and theft at the president’s house on Phala Phala farm.  

Though Rhoode contended he was doing his own preliminary investigation on the security breach to establish a threat as per instruction of Mfazi, Gcaleka said Rhoode’s contention is not supported by the evidence.  

Her final report will likely find that Rhoode acted improperly by investigating the housebreaking without registering a case.  

TimesLIVE

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