On Friday, the Constitutional Court will make a big decision in the Phala Phala case. This decision could bring up questions about who is responsible at the highest level of government and see how far Parliament can protect Cyril Ramaphosa from being questioned.
The apex court confirmed that judgment in the matter brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters will be handed down on May 8 at 10am, following months of anticipation over a case that has kept the presidency under sustained political and legal pressure.
At the centre of the case is the EFF’s bid to overturn Parliament’s 2022 decision not to adopt the Section 89 panel report, which found that Ramaphosa may have a case to answer over the burglary at his Limpopo farm.
Reacting to the announcement, EFF national spokesperson Sinawo Thambo said the party had waited more than 500 days for the ruling and expects the court to restore accountability.
EFF national spokesperson Sinawo Thambo said the party approached the court to challenge what it views as Parliament’s failure to fulfil its constitutional duties.
“This judgment comes exactly 521 days after the matter was argued before the Constitutional Court,” he said.
Thambo added that the party had consistently pushed for action against the president.
“From the beginning, the EFF has been the lone and consistent voice demanding accountability for the criminality, secrecy, and abuse of power surrounding the Phala Phala scandal,” he said.
Thambo added that the party is awaiting the judgment with the expectation that the Constitutional Court will ensure the Section 89 report is returned to Parliament for proper consideration and accountability processes.
The case stems from a February 2020 break-in at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm, where about $580,000 (around R8 million at the time) was allegedly stolen from a sofa.
The EFF has repeatedly criticised the delay in the judgment, staging demonstrations and raising concerns that prolonged timelines risk weakening public confidence in the judiciary and accountability processes.
The legal challenge, heard in November 2024, places Parliament’s handling of the Section 89 report under scrutiny, raising questions about whether political considerations influenced its decision-making.
Meanwhile, findings by the Independent Police Investigative Directorate have added further pressure, pointing to an alleged cover-up linked to the robbery. The report recommends disciplinary action against two SAPS officers, including Major General Wally Rhoode and Constable HH Rekhoto.
Investigators found that Rhoode failed to open a formal case docket and instead led an unauthorised operation to trace suspects and recover the stolen money, while Rekhoto was found to have misrepresented official travel and conducted surveillance under false pretences.
The report also flagged misuse of state resources and warned that the conduct of those involved had undermined the integrity of the police service.
Civil society organisations and anti-corruption groups have raised concerns about the findings, arguing that the report points to broader gaps in accountability mechanisms beyond the implicated police officers.
While some political parties have called for direct action against Ramaphosa, the president has maintained that the allegations relating to a cover-up have no bearing on him and should not be linked to his conduct.
The matter continues to divide opinion, with watchdog groups insisting that accountability in the Phala Phala saga must extend beyond two officials if public confidence in oversight institutions is to be restored.
The Star