PHUTI MOSOMANE
PRESIDENT Cyril Ramaphosa has made the decision not to pursue legal action in challenging the section 89 panel report on the Phala Phala scandal, which found that he may have a case to answer.
According to presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya, Ramaphosa has sought advice on the Constitutional Court’s ruling concerning the independent panel’s investigation into Phala Phala and its associated report.
“The President has thus been advised not to institute proceedings before the High Court for review and setting aside of the panel report at this stage. President Ramaphosa reserves his right to bring such proceedings … should the circumstances change,” Magwenya said during a media briefing on Monday.
He said Ramaphosa has received advice on the Constitutional Court’s decision regarding the independent panel into Phala Phala and associated report.
“The President has been advised…that the panel report and all issues associated with it have become moot and there are no practical and legal consequences because on 13 December the National Assembly decided to reject the motion to refer the report to an impeachment committee. While that decision remains valid, the Section 89 panel report carries no weight in law”.
Retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo led the panel, which was appointed by Speaker of the National Assembly, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, to determine whether to initiate impeachment proceedings against Ramaphosa following allegations of his involvement in concealing a burglary at his farm.
The Section 89 panel report, which was highly critical, found that Ramaphosa may have committed serious violations of anti-corruption laws and the Constitution.
The report raised questions about why the burglary and theft were not reported in accordance with Section 34(1) of the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (PRECCA) or to the police for investigation.
It also questioned the involvement of the Namibian police in handling the matter discreetly and highlighted allegations that Ramaphosa abused his position as Head of State to initiate an investigation and seek assistance from the Namibian President in apprehending a suspect.
The report concluded that the information presented to the panel indicates that the President may have committed serious violations of various sections of the Constitution, including sections 96(2)(a) and 96(2)(b), as well as Section 34(1) of PRECCA.
“Why was the house breaking and theft not reported in terms of section 34 (1) of PRECCA (Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act) or to any other police officer for investigation,” the panel asked.
“Why did the South Africa police request the Namibian police requested to handle the matter with discretion? The President abused his position as Head of State to have the matter investigated and seek the assistance of the Namibian President to apprehend a suspect.”
The report further suggested that Ramaphosa engaged in serious misconduct by acting in a manner inconsistent with his office and by exposing himself to a conflict between his official responsibilities and his private business.
In March, the Constitutional Court dismissed Ramaphosa’s application for direct access to challenge the validity of the Section 89 Independent Panel’s report. The court determined that there was no basis for exclusive jurisdiction or direct access, leading to the dismissal of the main application.
Adding to the controversy, the South African Revenue Services (SARS) confirmed that it has no record of the alleged $580,000 brought into the country by a Sudanese businessman named Hazim Mustafa for the purpose of purchasing buffaloes at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm.
The United Democratic Movement (UDM) said on Monday it welcomed the announcement made on behalf of President Ramaphosa that he will no longer be challenging the lawfulness and validity of the report of the Independent Panel on Phala Phala which was chaired by Ngcobo.
“The legal challenge never had any merit, but was launched to mislead Parliament into believing that the matter was “before the courts” and to coerce the Speaker to disallow the request of the UDM and other political parties for a secret ballot. It was also used to open the way for Ramaphosa to stand for re-election as ANC President at NASREC. In short it was a blatant abuse of the court process to achieve ulterior motives,” said UDM leader Bantu Holomisa.
The UDM also called on Advocate Shamila Batohi, the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP), to initiate charges against Ramaphosa, taking into account the substantial evidence presented by the Ngcobo panel.
The party said considering the gravity of the situation and the NDPP’s lack of action thus far, a deadline of 1 June 2023 is set for Advocate Batohi to bring charges against Ramaphosa. Failure to do so will necessitate immediate legal intervention, urging the appropriate court to compel her to take action.
“Given recent conduct on the part of the NPA in giving public support to Mr Ramaphosa as an accused person in criminal proceedings and its general record of lack of independence, the UDM will be consulting with its legal team even before the deadline,” said Holomisa.
INSIDE POLITICS
