Phala Phala findings ‘an immediate crisis’ for Ramaphosa’s political career

President Cyril Ramaphosa’s campaign for ANC leadership took a heavy blow last night when the Section 89 panel report into the burglary at his Phala Phala game farm found he may have committed serious violations of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act as well as the constitution.

Such serious misconduct may have been carried out “in a way that is inconsistent for his office” the report said. Parliament’s Section 89 independent panel of experts handed over its report to National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula yesterday.

The panel, headed by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, was responsible for investigating whether the president had committed an impeachable offence in his handling of the burglary in February 2020.

Its findings come just over a fortnight before the ANC’s critical elective conference, at which Ramaphosa was expected to win nomination as president by a wide margin. The latest development will have given ammunition to his political enemies and challengers.

Immediate crisis

Political analyst Ralph Mathekga said last night the report finding placed Ramaphosa’s political career and future into an immediate crisis. He said this was a finding by a properly constituted body, whereas other people just faced allegations.

Mathekga said the attack on Ramaphosa’s presidency would be severe.

“Ramaphosa has an immediate crisis. The reality is he can no longer be a champion of anti-corruption. The findings were quite damning and it does not paint a picture of a person who is trustworthy,” he said.

“Even those who were supporting him would have to re-consider their positions. This is all happening in his first term and he wants a second term which would be more disastrous than what we have already seen.”

It’s the first strike against Ramaphosa in impeachment proceedings initiated by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) earlier this year and comes as the ANC is gearing up to re-elect him as its leader for a second term this month at Nasrec.

ALSO READ: ‘No one is above the law’ – Politicians react to Phala Phala report findings

The panel made their findings based only on documentation presented to them. No oral arguments were heard. In terms of the ANC’s step aside rule, as Ramaphosa has not yet been charged criminally, he is not obliged to do so. However, the looming threat could have serious consequences for him at Nasrec.

According to Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya, the Section 89 process “presented an unprecedented and extraordinary moment” for SA’s constitutional democracy.

“President Ramaphosa reiterates the statement he made in his submission to the panel: ‘I have endeavoured, throughout my tenure as president, not only to abide by my oath but to set an example of respect for the constitution, for its institutions, for due process and the law. I categorically deny that I have violated this oath in any way, and I similarly deny that I am guilty of any of the allegations made against me’.”

Ramaphosa will ‘walk away’ unscathed

Meanwhile, Democratic Alliance leader John Steenhuisen says Ramaphosa will “walk away’ unscathed.

“For now, I suspect the president is going to walk away from this and obviously they’re going to try and portray this in the media,” he said yesterday.

The establishment of the panel began when Mapisa-Nqakula accepted a request by the ATM for a Section 89 inquiry to be established.

ALSO READ: Phala Phala report: Ramaphosa maintains innocence despite findings against him

The party’s motion was based on former spy boss Arthur Fraser’s criminal complaint in June against the president for money laundering, kidnapping and corruption.

ATM leader Vuyo Zungula said the party was pleased Mapisa-Nqakula explained what parliament was supposed to do in terms of allowing members of parliament MPs to hold the executive accountable.

He alleged Ramaphosa was involved in an intricate cover up of the crime after burglars, allegedly working in cahoots with his domestic worker, broke into his property and stole millions of US dollars in cash.

Fraser further claimed the suspects were subsequently kidnapped, interrogated and bribed to conceal the truth.

Info

The panel has conclude that information placed before it discloses, prima facie, that Ramaphosa may have committed:

• A serious violation of sections 96(2)(a).
• A serious violation of section 34(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act.
• A serious misconduct in that the president violated section 96(2)(b) by acting in a way that is inconsistent with his office.
• A serious misconduct in that the president violated section 96(2)(b) by exposing himself to a situation involving a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private business.

– lungas@citizen.co.za