Cyril's Phala Phala case far from over, says NPA boss

THE NPA’s Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCU) is currently ‘dealing’ with the Limpopo Director of Public Prosecution’s decision not to prosecute in the Phala Phala , says Director of Public Prosecutions Advocate Shamila Batohi.

“It is in review. The matter is in head office. It is being dealt with by the Specialised Commercial Crime Unit (SCU),’ Batohi said.

She was responding to a follow-up question by EFF leader Julius Malema at the parliamentary inquiry probing allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi.

Malema raised his concerns that Batohi came to the Parliament and did not know what was happening with the Phala Phala case that was referred to the Limpopo Director of Public Prosecution.

“It will be very worrisome if you come before this platform, and say you don't know what is happening,’ he said, adding that the Limpopo DPP refused in 2024 to prosecute the case involving the theft of US dollars from the farm owned by President Cyril Ramaphosa.

MK Party's Vusi Shongwe said Batohi was perceived as Ramaphosa’s protector and asked why Ramaphosa was not charged.

In her response, Batohi said there were two matters related to Phala-Phala.

One was the possession of US dollars by Ramaphosa that was opened by former State Security Agency head Arthur Fraser-four million US dollars were stolen in 2020 from the Phala Phala farm owned by Ramaphosa.

“There is no decision yet. This matter is with the DPP in Limpopo. The file is with the (SCU) in head office and they are going to get a panel to consider the matter.”

She said there was also the case in connection with the theft of cash from the farm, which was currently in court.

Malema said there was a decision by the Limpopo DPP not to prosecute.

“There are people who took it on review. When the Limpopo DPP declined it was brought to her (Batohi's) attention,” Malema added.

Shongwe said the parliamentary Section 189 panel had found that there was a prima facie case against Ramaphosa and that the Hawks had indicated the matter was on her desk.

Batohi said it was incorrect that the matter was with her.

“I would have reports from the DPP, not a complaint from the Hawks. There would be reports in terms of high profile cases but there is nothing on my desk for my consideration in this matter,” she said.

 She stated that there were processes that were being followed on the matter.

 “The DPP takes a decision. Anybody is entitled to ask the NDPP to review. That review process has not kicked in,” said Batohi.

She reiterated that the matter was not on her desk.

“There are processes that are happening. The matter is at head office … If the DPP has done wrong in taking a decision, of course, I must intervene. There are processes and the matter is with SCU at the moment.”

Responding to questions, Batohi said she was looking for evidence by IDAC head Advocate Andrea Johnson at the parliamentary inquiry that she was part of a panel that interviewed candidates, including her husband, at the now defunct Directorate of Special Operations, popularly known as Scorpions.

Johnson told the inquiry last week that she had recused herself when her husband was due to be  interviewed.

Batohi said it was an error of judgement by Johnson to have been part of the interviewing panel.

“I will look into that and whether it was appropriate conduct and if there is anything to be done about it,’ she said, adding that the matter happened 20 years ago when Johnson was a young prosecutor.

“It is certainly something to be looked at because on the face of it, it's a really bad error of judgement. She should not have been on the panel.”

Cape Times