South African court clears Cyril Ramaphosa of misleading parliament, money-laundering

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane had alleged in July that the South African President deliberately misled parliament about the 500,000 rand donation for his campaign to succeed Jacob Zuma as head of the ruling African National Congress

March 10, 2020 05:54 pm | Updated 05:57 pm IST - JOHANNESBURG

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. File

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa. File

South Africa's High Court on Tuesday cleared President Cyril Ramaphosa of lying to parliament about the source of donations to his 2017 campaign to lead the ruling party, setting aside a potentially damaging report by a powerful anti-graft watchdog.

The high court judges described the watchdog's approach as based on a mistaken and “fatally flawed” reading of the law.

The case was seen by many analysts as a proxy of the bitter power rivalry inside the ANC between supporters of Mr. Ramaphosa and his scandal-plagued predecessor Jacob Zuma.

Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane had alleged in July that Mr. Ramaphosa deliberately misled parliament about the 500,000 rand ($32,500) donation for his campaign to succeed Jacob Zuma as head of the ruling African National Congress (ANC).

In her report she said there was also prima facie evidence of money laundering involving millions of rand in the handling of the donations, sparking an angry response from Mr. Ramaphosa, who swiftly challenged the legality and motivation of the report.

Also read: Who is Cyril Ramaphosa?

The high court, in a sitting of three justices, concurred with Mr. Ramaphosa's complaint.

“It is apparent from the report that the Public Protector was confused about the legal foundation of her finding,” said Keoagile Elias Matojane.

“The Public Protector's finding on the issue of misleading parliament is fatally flawed due to a material error of law.”

The court added that there was no evidence to support the allegation of money laundering and that it was also outside of the watchdog's jurisdiction to investigate the donations as they were of a private, and not public, nature.

The finding against Mkhwebane's conduct, which includes the award of costs for Mr. Ramaphosa's lawyers, is likely to bolster calls for her removal from office by opposition parties.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.