Story audio is generated using AI
The parliamentary committee investigating whether President Cyril Ramaphosa should face impeachment will consider fresh evidence submitted by ActionSA, including controversial South African Police Service (SAPS) disciplinary findings that cleared two senior presidential protection officers implicated in the Phala Phala saga.Committee chairperson Makashule Gana confirmed the party’s submission would be added to the committee’s evidentiary record and considered alongside other material before the inquiry.Gana said he intended engaging the chairpersons of parliamentary portfolio committees that had previously dealt with matters relating to Phala Phala to obtain information that could assist the committee in carrying out its work.His decision means the committee will consider ActionSA’s latest submission as part of the growing body of evidence before the impeachment inquiry.The development is a boost for ActionSA, which wants the Section 89 committee to scrutinise the disciplinary proceedings involving Maj-Gen Wally Rhoode and Brig Hennie Rekhoto, two members of the Presidential Protection Service whose conduct came under scrutiny after the 2020 burglary at Ramaphosa’s Limpopo game farm.ActionSA argued the disciplinary findings expose serious inconsistencies between SAPS’ internal process, the Independent Police Investigative Directorate’s (Ipid) investigation and the public protector’s findings.The party has asked the committee to obtain the complete disciplinary record from SAPS, including witness statements, evidence bundles, transcripts and legal opinions. It also wants Ipid and the chairperson of the disciplinary hearings to appear before MPs to explain why SAPS reached conclusions that differed materially from those of Ipid and the public protector.According to ActionSA, the evidence is directly relevant to the impeachment inquiry because it deals with the conduct of officials who allegedly acted on behalf of the president during and after the burglary, and could help establish the sequence of events and the extent of Ramaphosa’s accountability.The submission follows ActionSA’s acquisition of the disciplinary records through the Promotion of Access to Information Act.The party claimed the hearings that cleared Rhoode and Rekhoto raise several concerns. It argued that despite Ipid identifying alleged breaches of SAPS regulations, the disciplinary process dealt with only a handful of charges before finding both officers not guilty.ActionSA further alleged key evidence was excluded, crucial witness statements were treated inconsistently and several findings previously made by Ipid were never ventilated during the disciplinary process.One of the most explosive claims in the submission is that Rhoode allegedly told the disciplinary hearing Ramaphosa instructed him to accompany presidential adviser Bhekani Chauke to Namibia during efforts to trace suspects linked to the burglary. ActionSA argued this could place responsibility for the controversial cross-border operation directly at the president’s feet.The Section 89 committee is tasked with determining whether Ramaphosa committed a serious violation of the constitution or the law, engaged in serious misconduct, or is unable to perform the functions of his office — the constitutional grounds on which a sitting president may be removed.TimesLIVE
