Cyril Ramaphosa did not violate ethics code: public protector on Phala Phala scandal

A public protector's report on the Phala Phala “farmgate” scandal has found President Cyril Ramaphosa did not violate the Executive Ethics Code.

This was announced by acting public protector advocate Kholeka Gcaleka on Friday.

“The allegation that the president improperly and in violation of the provisions of the Executive Ethics Code 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 farm is not substantiated,” she said.

The report investigated whether Ramaphosa violated the code after the theft of millions of US dollars from his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo on February 9 2020.

The complaint to the public protector's office was made by African Transformation Movement leader Vuyo Zungula after a criminal complaint laid by former spy boss Arthur Fraser in June last year.

In March, TimesLIVE reported that Gcaleka's preliminary report found the allegation that Ramaphosa had exposed himself to a risk of 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 the 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 the US dollars stolen emanated from a private cash transaction between private parties.

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

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

Gcaleka said it was apparent Ramaphosa was not at the farm during the 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 2019/2020 financial year.

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

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

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

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

Evidence proved the daily management of the farm was the responsibility of Hendrik von Wielligh as GM, 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 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' (PPS) Maj-Gen Wally Rhoode deployed at the farm to investigate the crime, Gcaleka found this too was unsubstantiated.

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

On conflict of interest, the president contended he was advised that the interest he retained in Phala Phala as a game and cattle farming operation did not give rise to a risk of a conflict of interest or expose him to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private interests.

He also remains a trustee and beneficiary of the Tshivhase Trust, which owns the farm property.

The report did not agree the president as sole director of the company had an obligation to report the crime.

“The contention that the president was the only person, as a member of the CC, to report a crime as directed by section 34(1) of PRECCA, is not supported by a proper reading of the relevant section, and that both Messrs Von Wielligh and Ndlovu too, were persons of authority mandated to report the theft as envisaged in section 34(4)(e) and (i) of PRECCA and had an obligation, as persons with the personal knowledge of the crime, to report the housebreaking,” said the report.

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

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

The SA Reserve Bank is also probing the matter.

It said its investigation is ongoing and would not comment publicly thereon.

TimesLIVE

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