MPs unhappy with Phala Phala probe, says intelligence committee ‘bound by secrecy’

The Democratic Alliance (DA) has reiterated its call for an ad hoc committee to investigate the allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa regarding the Phala Phala farm theft scandal.

Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence has been tasked with investigating specific allegations arising out the February 2020 theft at the president’s Phala Phala farm in Limpopo.

National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula on Thursday directed the committee to look into whether Deputy State Security Minister Zizi Kodwa was involved in the alleged cover-up of the theft and whether a secret crime intelligence fund was used in the undercover operations.

‘Bound by secrecy’

Mapisa-Nqakula’s referral comes after DA’s request for an ad hoc committee was declined by the Speaker last month.

While DA leader John Steenhuisen said they would consider its legal options, the party has once again expressed discontent over the Speaker’s decision.

“Secondly, the standing committee on intelligence is a confidential committee in which the members of the committee are bound by secrecy.

“We believe that this move to refer parts of our requests of an ad-hoc committee, an investigation into President Cyril Ramaphosa is done in order for the Speaker to evade having Parliament doing its job of holding the president and his executive to account in a transparent manner. And so, we will be exploring our next step,” DA MP Siviwe Gwarube told SABC News on Thursday.

ALSO READ: Ramaphosa farm theft: DA urges Parliament to summon Cele over cover-up allegations

Sharing the same sentiments, United Democratic Movement (UDM) leader and MP Bantu Holomisa said the Speaker was wasting their time.

“The joint standing committee on intelligence is a toothless dog and it has no capacity and powers to investigate these serious allegations associated with Phala Phala saga,” he said.

The DA previously asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in the United States (US), the South African Revenue Service (Sars) and the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) to also investigate the Phala Phala theft.

Meanwhile, the Public Protector’s office is investigating whether Ramaphosa violated the Executive Members’ Ethics Code by not reporting the theft to the police.

Section 89

Last week, the Speaker accepted a request by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) for a Section 89 inquiry to be established against Ramaphosa.

As a result, an independent panel will decide whether the president will be subject to a process that may lead to his removal from office in terms of Section 89 of the Constitution and Rule 129A-Q of the National Assembly Rules.

This, however, does not constitute a parliamentary impeachment process.

The panel must consist of three fit and proper, competent and experienced South Africans, who may include a judge.

Freedom Front Plus (FF Plus) leader Dr Pieter Groenewald said his party would be nominating criminal justice expert Dr Llewellyn Curlewis to serve on the panel tasked with deciding whether there is sufficient evidence for the impeachment of Ramaphosa.

READ MORE: Phala Phala farm theft: Ipid to investigate police officers allegedly involved in ‘cover-up’

“If sufficient evidence is found, the National Assembly could institute a process in terms of Section 89 of the constitution to remove the president from office,” Gronewald said in a statement on Wednesday.

“The FF Plus’ decision to nominate Dr Curlewis is motivated by his proven experience and expertise relating to South African criminal law. He is known to be an objective individual without political ties whose decision on the matter will be guided solely by merit and criminal law principles.”

The FF Plus is part of a forum of political opposition parties who agree that committees must be established in parliament to hold the ANC government accountable.