Political parties are set to announce their plans of action to hold President Cyril Ramaphosa and his executive to account in relation to the Phala Phala Farmgate scandal. Picture: Phando Jikelo/African News Agency(ANA)
Cape Town - As political parties are set to announce their plans of action to hold President Cyril Ramaphosa and his executive to account in relation to the Phala Phala Farmgate scandal, some experts say investigations can be expedited in a case of this magnitude in the public’s interest.
Former State Security Agency head Arthur Fraser accused Ramaphosa of money laundering and kidnapping and opened a criminal case against the president in June.
The charges relate to Ramaphosa allegedly failing to report a case of theft at his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo in 2020.
Political parties have rallied together and have already held two meetings in their collective goal to hold the Executive and Ramaphosa to account.
“We are unanimous that the President must be held accountable as a matter of urgency and no delays, distractions and procrastination should be permitted,” seven parties previously said.
They are expected to inform the public about the next move on Thursday.
The Hawks on Monday would not confirm whether Ramaphosa had issued a statement yet, but confirmed the investigation continued.
“What we can confirm is that investigation in the Phala Phala matter still continues but we cannot disclose who has been contacted for whatever reason or from whom statements have been obtained, as this is subject to our investigation,” Hawks spokesperson Thandi Mbambo said.
Ramaphosa spokesperson Vincent Magwena also refused to confirm whether Ramaphosa had made a statement to the Hawks yet, referring the Cape Times back to the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation.
Financial authorities still remain mum on what action they have taken, if any, maintaining they do not disclose information about on such matters.
“As you may be aware, SARS does not comment on the affairs of any taxpayer, in accordance with Section 69 of the Tax Administration Act that prohibits SARS from divulging tax payer information to third parties,” SARS said.
South African Reserve Bank spokesperson, Thoraya Pandy added: “We have previously commented on this matter. As the Reserve Bank we do not comment on any investigation of either an individual or an entity.”
Lawyer and social activist Rod Solomons said the investigations could be expedited if the government chose to do so.
“The cases by the Reserve Bank and the Hawks could be separate, but they would collaborate. The Hawks would look into the possibility of commercial crime and SARS a possible transgression of foreign exchange regulation. Investigators and National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) prosecutors work together, the NPA would be abreast all the time. They make a decision within a reasonable period. The matter is in the public interest. You want to be as quick as possible to get to the truth to either clear the president and dispel the notion that the president is guilty of a crime or prove the notion that he is guilty of a crime. It is both in the country’s and the president's interest for the matter to be expedited. You don't always prosecute because you have a water tight case. No case is water tight. That is why there are lawyers to defend. There's another independent part: a judge who must preside over matters. An accused may have a better defence lawyer and poke holes in some of our stuff. In another insurance, the defence cannot triumph over the evidence we have against you. We are all equal before the law,” he explained.
Policing and security expert Eldred de Klerk differed, saying such cases could take years, as the authorities could not risk making any mistakes.
“This involves accusations by actors coming from other countries, so there needs to be cooperation between our police and the Namibian police, or it has to be done through Interpol and SADAC and its regional police. The Presidency said Ramaphosa wants to cooperate and is cooperating, however he was not present. Investigators have to go through who was present, what role they might have played over that time and what we can reasonably assume they should know, so that we can begin to question them all, and whether they are still available to be questioned takes time. Then through questioning them you assess what they should know, given the circumstances. It also still has to be verified. Did it happen as we suspect? Where was the money, who was there? The actual crime has to be investigated.
“This is compounded by the fact that this took place in 2020, and people who were there may not be available anymore. There are things that are easy to find out and things that are not.
“They also have to present their evidence to the prosecuting authority to see if they have a case or not.”
Cape Times
Related Topics: