Cape Town – A three-member panel of experts has 30 days to determine whether President Cyril Ramaphosa has a case to answer to on his Phala Phala farm fiasco.
The panel’s focus will centre on four charges in trying to determine whether he has violated the Constitution and breached the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act.
The African Transformation Movement (ATM) submitted the four charges to Parliament when it tabled its motion of no confidence against Ramaphosa four months ago.
ATM leader Vuyo Zungula submitted his motion of no confidence in terms of Section 89 of the Constitution, and National Assembly rules, on June 14.
This was after former State Security Agency head Arthur Fraser laid a charge at the Rosebank police station in Johannesburg.
Fraser said in his affidavit that Ramaphosa kept foreign currency concealed in his furniture at his Phala Phala farm, which was prima facie proof of money laundering.
It was previously reported that about R62m was stolen from the farm and people were paid to keep quiet about the matter.
Ramaphosa, who confirmed the incident, has claimed that the amount involved was far less.
He has on numerous occasions undertaken to subject himself to any investigation, including the parliamentary inquiry.
On Monday, Mapisa-Nqakula shared the documents – a draft resolution and charge sheet – that have been referred for consideration of the panel, which has 30 days to complete its work.
The draft resolution, which says the House “resolves to initiate an inquiry into the removal from Office of President of the Republic, Mr MC Ramaphosa, on the grounds of serious violation of the Constitution or the law, and serious misconduct”.
The charge sheet, compiled by the ATM, said Ramaphosa was allegedly guilty of serious violation of the Constitution and serious misconduct.
The report said Ramaphosa allegedly violated the Constitution by conducting paid work.
This was based on Ramphosa telling delegates at an ANC conference that he was a farmer who bought and sold animals.
“The statement by the president confirms that he is actively running his farming business and this also means the president misled the nation when in 2014, on assuming office as deputy president, he said that all his business interests would be managed by a blind trust,” reads the document.
It is also alleged that the president failed to report the theft on his farm to any police official.
This would be in violation of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, which placed the duty on any person to report corrupt transactions to any police official.
“Reporting the matter to General Wally Rhoode, a member of the Presidential Protection Unit, is not in compliance with the South African Police Service Amendment Act …which directs that reporting should be made to the police official in the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation in terms of Section 34(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act, 2004 (Act 12 of 2004).
“The fact that there is no case number to date is proof that the manner in which the purported reporting was made was irregular and unlawful,” reads the document.
It alleges that Ramaphosa was involved in misconduct by exposing himself to the risk of a conflict between his official responsibilities and private interest.
“A member of the Presidential Protection Unit, General Wally Rhoode, was directed to deal with security issues in the private farm (of the president) in violation of the provisions of Section 96(2)(b) of (the) Constitution.
“President Ramaphosa’s life and limb was not threatened by the burglary and thus General Wally Rhoode had no business to be investigating anything at the Phala Phala Farm as unlawfully directed by the president.”
Another charge stated that Ramaphosa allegedly acted inconsistent with his office by giving an unlawful instruction to Rhoode to investigate the burglary at his private farm.
The ATM has welcomed the start of the work of panel, with the party’s communications manager, Zama Ntshona saying they trusted that the panel would use the opportunity to entrench the rule of law and provide a way for Ramaphosa to account.
“ATM calls on the panel to take advantage of the hard groundwork done by the ATM.
“The ATM has already provided irrefutable and credible evidence, including supplementary evidence which will make the work of the panel easy, so much that even the 30 days will be too long to finalise this matter,” Ntshona said.
Cape Times
