JUSTICE MALALA | If Cyril can’t answer crucial questions, SA will be back in its 2010s nightmare

The extremely serious allegations and evidence of theft of eye-watering amounts of cash at President Cyril Ramaphosa’s farm place SA on a turbulent and even perilous path into the future. The country, having faced horrific riots and other upheavals in the past 12 months, may see its current president unseated. That’s how serious these current events are.

Of course, it matters that the allegations emanate from the controversial Arthur Fraser, the former spy and prisons boss who freed the convict Jacob Zuma from prison in 2021, and who faces numerous allegations of wrongdoing himself. It also matters that these allegations form part of a concerted, coordinated campaign to discredit Ramaphosa and frustrate his renewal of the state and his own party. It matters, too, that disinformation and misinformation are part of the key tools used by the state capture lot to avoid accountability for their misdeeds. This means we must proceed with care and caution.

That, however, cannot diminish the massive volume of evidence that has been put into the public domain. The additional evidence that journalists are unearthing from what happened in SA and Namibia — where one of the suspects in the robbery at Ramaphosa’s farm was sheltering — is of such a serious nature that it must trigger a wave of consequences.

Much will depend on how Ramaphosa responds to several extremely troubling questions raised by the Fraser revelations. First, what was the president thinking stashing such humungous amounts of foreign currency on his farm? What should ordinary South Africans believe about the precariousness of the South African state when the head of the country has basically hoarded cash to do a quick runner if trouble hits?

The only time I have heard of people stashing such monies in cash in their homes is in failed, corrupt states or in drug cartels. It is not just deeply troubling; it is disquieting to hear such allegations about a leader who has won plaudits for his commitment to the rule of law. Of course, we do not know that the amounts mentioned are true. Fraser says in his affidavit it could be anywhere upwards of $4m (R62m). Stunningly, the Sunday Times revealed yesterday that the manager of the farm did not know about the theft until last week.

If Ramaphosa is charged, both he and his supporters in the ANC NEC cannot turn around and say that he must not ‘step aside’ from his position as party president. He will, like Ace Magashule, be forced to go home.

Which raises the even more serious question of a cover-up. Seeing Ramaphosa has already admitted there was a robbery at his farm, what is crucial now is whether the president tried to conceal the entire incident, whether such concealment can be proven, what he knew of the investigation (carried out by his protection team and private investigators and not regular  SA Police Service detectives), and why he wanted to keep it all secret.

The answers to these questions will have immediate and far-reaching consequences. Just under two months ago Ramaphosa and his allies in the ANC national executive committee won the fight to have criminally charged party members barred from contesting for any leadership positions in the party. The ANC will hold its five-yearly national conference in December. Ramaphosa is almost certain to win, unless he is criminally charged in the next six months.’

Now, if this were any old case handled by the SAPS, there would be no concern that charges will be laid in the next six months. The investigation would drag on for years.

With this one, however, it is likely that things will move quickly.

If Ramaphosa is charged, both he and his supporters in the ANC NEC cannot turn around and say that he must not “step aside” from his position as party president. He will, like Ace Magashule, be forced to go home. Further, he will have to be released from his duties as state president so that he can fight the criminal charges on his own time (remember the words used by Thabo Mbeki when he fired Jacob Zuma in June 2005). Finally, he will not be able to stand for re-election as ANC president at the conference in December.

In the meantime, a replacement for Ramaphosa will have to be found. This would not be a problem if the values Ramaphosa has overtly represented could be identified in a strong contender. David Mabuza, the deputy president of the ANC and the near-certain replacement if Ramaphosa were to go, has a chequered history and has never been strong on ethics, values and principles. Would he, for example, implement the Zondo commission’s report without fear or favour?

Without its leader, a traumatised Ramaphosa faction (which has always been fragile and tentative) faces the prospect of loss at the December conference. That clears the way for the return of the Zuma faction, the return to power of the likes of Fraser himself, and the renewed capture of the state.

This is serious.