Vuyo Zungula, head of the African Transformation Movement (ATM), has leveled serious allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa, contending that the President’s legal effort to halt impeachment proceedings tied to the Phala Phala scandal demonstrates bad faith and erodes constitutional principles of accountability and transparency.
During an extensive commentary, Zungula examined the escalating political scrutiny surrounding the President over the unresolved matter of undeclared foreign currency discovered at his Limpopo property. He noted he had predicted Ramaphosa would neither step down nor directly confront the allegations in his recent national address.
“I was expecting him to do exactly what he did: firstly, he’s not going to resign. Secondly, to deflect,” Zungula said. “What he did there was a classic case of deflection because he spoke about how when he came in as president he committed to reforms, renewal, new dawn, etc., instead of answering the questions that are asked about Phala Phala.”
Zungula framed Ramaphosa’s choice to contest the Phala Phala report through the courts as a strategic postponement rather than a sincere effort to obtain legal resolution. While acknowledging the President’s constitutional entitlement to seek judicial review, Zungula stressed that the timing of the move invites scrutiny regarding its underlying motivation.
“If he was not doing it in bad faith, if he just wanted legal clarity, from the time the report was issued, he would have just went and said, ‘I do not want any report that is saying that I’ve got a case to answer because I don’t have a case to answer.’ He would have challenged it back then,” Zungula argued.
The ATM leader contextualized the controversy within its timeline: the alleged incident occurred in 2020, and whistleblower Arthur Fraser brought it into public view in 2022. Zungula stressed that South Africans have a right to clarity regarding the substantial sums of undeclared foreign currency recovered from the President’s residence.
“You can’t then have a president as a head of state refusing transparency, refusing accountability,” he said. “If I can come to your house and you pick up a bag full of cash, what is going to come to your mind is either corruption or some form of criminal activity.”
Zungula also raised concerns about allegations in the IPID report detailing torture at the Phala Phala farm by Wally Rhoode, head of the presidential protection unit. He questioned the muted public response to claims that individuals were allegedly subjected to torture on the private property of a sitting head of state.
“In a normal country whereby people were actually focused on the rule of law regardless who’s in power, I don’t think people would be okay with a head of the presidential protection unit torturing people in the private farm of a president,” Zungula stated.
Turning to parliamentary dynamics, Zungula voiced doubts about the impartiality of the newly formed impeachment committee. He observed that the 31-member body spans 16 political parties, with the ANC allocated nine seats.
“The ANC as an organization has taken a position to protect the president,” Zungula said. “Now it is clear that all of their employees, they are going to protect the president.”
He further highlighted inconsistencies in the financial details surrounding the alleged buffalo sale central to the scandal. While Ramaphosa has cited a figure of $580,000, Zungula referenced evidence from the Phala Phala court proceedings and forensic assessments indicating sums surpassing $800,000.
“If these guys stole $800,000, and you said there was only $580,000 because there was a sale of buffaloes for $580,000, where is the $220,000 coming from?” Zungula asked.
Zungula also clarified procedural distinctions, noting that while resignation or a successful motion of no confidence permits a former president to retain benefits and status, impeachment would result in the complete forfeiture of such privileges.
Looking forward, Zungula indicated that the Phala Phala issue is likely to remain a pivotal topic leading up to the ANC’s 2027 elective conference. He argued that by shielding Ramaphosa, the ANC has elevated what began as a matter of individual accountability into a wider institutional dilemma.
“The minute the ANC took a decision to protect him from clear wrongdoing, it no longer became a Ramaphosa issue. It’s an ANC issue now,” he said.
Should Ramaphosa leave office through any avenue, Zungula outlined key criteria for choosing a successor: the candidate must be free from corruption allegations and dedicated to economic transformation. He critiqued the current concentration of economic influence, observing that more than 80% of government expenditure flows to large, historically white-owned enterprises.
“You need a president that is going to say the state must intervene to transform the economy to absorb as many people as possible,” Zungula stated.
The ATM leader affirmed that his party would pursue legal avenues to counter any efforts to obstruct the impeachment process. He called on South Africans to champion a transparent inquiry, underscoring the extensive authority vested in the presidency.
“A head of state is such a powerful office. He appoints judges. If there’s a war, he is the sole person who can say we can go to war and defend this country,” Zungula said. “We need to satisfy ourselves as a country that that person who occupies such a big and powerful office is not under any form of foreign influence or criminal influence.”
Zungula concluded that the pursuit of truth regarding Phala Phala constitutes not a political vendetta, but an essential democratic safeguard.
“If the truth comes out that it was a legitimate sale, we move on. But if the truth comes out to say it was not a legitimate sale and there was some form of corruption, we get to root out such an individual from having such authority over our lives,” he said.