Fury as Ramaphosa stays mum on Phala Phala farm saga

Despite angry badgering from MPs, President Cyril Ramaphosa stuck to his guns by refusing to answer specific questions on the burglary at his Phala Phala game farm, saying he would let the investigative process be completed before commenting.

The much-delayed National Assembly question and answer session with Ramaphosa degenerated into a verbal battle in an afternoon of high drama, with the Parliamentary Security Services being called in to escort some “unparliamentary” MPs out of the house.

And Ramaphosa yesterday left many red faces by not answering a string of questions about the alleged millions stolen two years ago from his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo.

Enraged MPs said Ramaphosa failed to take the nation into his confidence, preferring to restrict his answers to an ongoing investigation.

A leading legal analyst, who described Phala Phala as “a serious matter”, said Ramaphosa should have given South Africans “a context into what happened – showing … he was not complicit in wrongdoing”.

Lawson Naidoo, executive secretary of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution, said: “While his explanation about not wanting to pre-empt an investigation is understandable, the president should have taken the nation into his confidence by giving context – demonstrating that he was not in the wrong.”

Asked about the legal implications of Ramaphosa’s response to parliament on the saga, advocate Paul Hoffman, director of Accountability Now, said Ramaphosa’s manner of answering on the Phala Phala matter – while in line with Section 35 of the constitution to avoid incriminating himself – showed a possibility of him being implicated.

In giving long-winded answers, Ramaphosa, who only received support from ANC MPs, struggled to give clear-cut responses, with members of opposition parties piling pressure on him for “undermining parliament” and “not answering questions”.

On whether he would have handled the Phala Phala incident differently by reporting the matter to the police, Ramaphosa said: “I know there is a great deal of interest to my answer to this question. I have never shied away from being accountable… I stand ready to cooperate with any investigations on this matter, which are ongoing by a variety of agencies.

“I will continue to respond to questions put by various authorities. They advised it was best to publicly deal with the theft when the investigative processes are over. “I am ready to take the nation into my confidence. But I should give space to allow [the investigative authorities] to deal with this.

“The law should take its own course – making it important that due process should be followed, including the parliamentary process. “There are people here that merely seek political mileage out of this.”

African Transformation Movement president Vuyolwethu Zungula, who raised the Phala Phala substantive motion in the parliamentary order paper, said Ramaphosa showed “unwillingness to engage the elected representatives on this particular issue”.

“The president has clearly not answered the question and we cannot accept the explanation on awaiting law enforcement investigations. “I cannot ask him a follow-up question when I have not been answered. The speaker should rule on this,” said Zungula.

Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula endured the wrath of MPs when she said: “It is not possible for the chair to prescribe to the executive on how to reply to questions in parliament.”

– brians@citizen.co.za

ALSO READ: Ramaphosa: Individuals, organisations using Phala Phala farm matter for political mileage