ActionSA has expressed cautious relief mixed with sharp criticism following the Constitutional Court’s announcement that it will deliver its long-awaited judgment on the Phala Phala matter within a month — nearly 500 days after hearing the review application.
ActionSA National Chairperson Michael Beaumont described the extended wait as “completely abnormal,” particularly for a case involving high-level accountability that South Africans have followed closely for years. He argued that government institutions appear to have gone to great lengths to shield President Cyril Ramaphosa from any consequences related to the scandal.
The Phala Phala scandal centres on a 2020 robbery at the president’s private farm in Limpopo, where large amounts of foreign currency — reportedly around half a million US dollars — were allegedly hidden in furniture. It later involved questions over the conduct of the Presidential Protection Unit in investigating the theft and broader issues of presidential accountability.
Beaumont welcomed the impending judgment but stressed the need for the court to deliver a ruling that upholds accountability. “We do need our courts to step up in this particular regard and we really do hope that they deliver a judgment that delivers accountability in this matter,” he said in an interview.
ActionSA has also taken issue with the continued withholding of an Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) report into the conduct of Presidential Protection Unit members. The party has written to the Police Minister seeking clarity on why the report has not been released, even after the minister publicly declared it declassified in February.
Beaumont suggested the delay in releasing the IPID report points to deeper problems. “If that report had vindicated these officers we would have had it by now,” he stated. He added that the report had been classified as top secret and, despite declassification, access is still being denied months later. Beaumont argued this indicates the unit’s members may have prioritised protecting the president over properly investigating the robbery.
He linked the handling of both the court judgment and the IPID report to a broader pattern in South African governance. “There’s a track record in this country of presidents being allowed to operate above the law,” Beaumont said, referencing past controversies such as the Nkandla fire pool incident. He claimed the current situation with President Ramaphosa shows little change.
Beaumont was particularly critical of parties that were vocal about Phala Phala while in opposition but have since joined the Government of National Unity (GNU). He accused them of being “bought” into the arrangement, resulting in their “deafening” silence on the issue. “It’s hard to speak up for other people when your mouth is full,” he remarked, suggesting these parties are now enjoying the benefits of government positions at the expense of their earlier commitments to accountability.
With President Ramaphosa leading a minority government reliant on other parties’ support, Beaumont argued there was an expectation that coalition partners would demand greater scrutiny. Instead, he said, ActionSA must continue carrying the torch of opposition on this matter.
The Constitutional Court’s upcoming ruling is expected to address challenges to Parliament’s handling of the Phala Phala issue, including an impeachment-related process. Observers across the political spectrum are watching closely for its implications on constitutional accountability and the separation of powers.
ActionSA maintains that transparency on both the court outcome and the IPID report remains essential for restoring public trust in institutions. Beaumont reiterated that parties like ActionSA, which have stayed outside the GNU, are positioned to push for answers where others have fallen silent.
