Analysts raise concerns over enforcement's handling of the Phala Phala scandal.
Image: IOL
Concerns are mounting regarding the handling of the Phala Phala scandal by law enforcement agencies, with analysts suggesting a concerted effort to shield President Cyril Ramaphosa from accountability.
This scrutiny intensified following Police Minister Senzo Mchunu's recent announcement in Parliament that the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) report on the scandal will not be made public.
Independent political analyst Professor Sipho Seepe stated, "There is no doubt that the entire law enforcement framework has been mobilised to protect President Ramaphosa from facing the consequences of the Phala Phala misdeeds. The Independent Parliamentary Panel's findings were unequivocal, confirming that he has a case to answer."
Seepe also noted that the Constitutional Court's deliberations were marred by distractions, with justices debating the nuances between sufficient evidence and prima facie evidence, rather than addressing the core issues at stake.
The IPID had been investigating the actions of VIP officers assigned to Ramaphosa, who allegedly conducted a covert operation in Namibia in 2020 to recover millions of US dollars reportedly stolen from the president's Phala Phala farm in Limpopo.
Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.
Seepe referenced the ongoing Constitutional Court case by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM), which challenges the National Assembly's decision not to initiate an impeachment inquiry against Ramaphosa in 2022.
The EFF argued that the Assembly's dismissal of the Section 89 independent panel report concerning the alleged stolen cash was irrational and unlawful.
Seepe criticised Minister Mchunu for playing his political cards cautiously, aligning with his party's stance on the matter.
"His position reflects the general dishonesty and hypocrisy surrounding Ramaphosa. The very courts that advocate for transparency as a cornerstone of democracy seem to apply this principle selectively when it comes to the president," he asserted.
Justice Owen Rogers, in a recent Constitutional Court session, recalibrated the entire engagement by focussing on undisputed facts.
He pointed out, “We then find that the $580,000 is not put into a safe and I would have thought more importantly not put into a bank where it would have earned an interest at about R2,300 per day. The first thing anybody who receives 8.7 million rand wants to do is to make sure it goes into their money market account. You don't leave that much money either in a safe or under a sofa.”
Justice Rogers further remarked, “A person loses 8.7 million rand, they would want to know who the investigating officer is and has been reported to the police. Is there a case pending? It is common cause that there wasn't … there was a deliberate decision because the president wanted to keep secret the source of the money that’s the background to where the panel was coming from.”
Political analyst Dr. Mpumelelo Breakfast emphasised that the Phala Phala issue has not been sufficiently scrutinised by state institutions or the ruling party, suggesting that leaders may be politically compromised.
He predicted that the scandal would resurface as a contentious topic amid the reconfiguration of African National Congress (ANC) structures in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng but maintained that honest discussions would only be possible after the president's term concludes.
IOL