Acting Public Protector Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka has cleared President Cyril Ramaphosa of any wrongdoing in the Phala Phala farm scandal, however she’s made adverse findings against the police for their handling of the matter.

Gcaleka, in the preliminary report, on the much-anticipated investigation says she’s found no basis to conclude that Ramaphosa contravened the Executive Ethics code.

The alleged breach of the latter code is the only basis for Gcaleka to investigate the matter.

The Public Protector has no jurisdiction to investigate a private sale between two individuals or entities. In the report, Gcaleka makes it clear the parameters of the law within which she was working.

The 191-page report, which Eyewitness News has seen, takes into account four different complaints about the 2020 burglary at the president’s Limpopo based farm, these include an initial complaint from the African Transformation Movement (ATM), the Democratic Alliance (DA) and two other individuals who are not in Parliament.

The Public Protector’s office has been investigating this highly politicised matter since 2022, during which period the Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane was suspended.

The complaints brought before the Chapter 9 Institution suggested the president undertook paid work while serving as the country’s head of state and that he exposed himself to situations where there was conflict of interest between his private interest and national responsibilities.

Ramaphosa was also accused of failing to report the matter to the police and possibly abusing his power when he informed his security detail of the incident.

“The allegation that the President improperly and in violation of the provisions of the Executive Ethics Code exposed himself to any risk of a conflict between his constitutional duties and obligations and his private interests arising from or affected by his alleged paid work in Phala farm is not substantiated,” writes Gcaleka in the report.

The Public Protector says there was no evidence to prove that Ramaphosa was actively involved in the day-to-day operations at Phala Phala or even Ntaba Nyoni, the private entity which manages the farm.

In the assessment of the evidence, the Public Protector’s office says most of the complaints before it were based on the criminal complaint by former spy-boss Arthur Fraser, who first blew the lid on the scandal in June 2022.

Fraser accused the president of attempting to cover up the crime, with members of the presidential protection unit – which at the time was led by Major-General Wally Rhoode.

Rhoode has since been demoted and is facing charges in relation to the improper handling of the home invasion at the president’s home.

The report relied on the presidential handbook in determining whether Ramaphosa abused his power when state resources were used to investigate the house robbery. This relates to members of the presidential protection services who were deployed to the farm.

“The President is entitled to static protection at all his private residences, which he uses from time to time during his term of office,” concludes the public protector.

While Ramaphosa is absolved of breaking any rules, the police are found wanting in their handling of the matter.

Gcaleka found Rhoode and Sergeant Hlulani Rikhotso, who also assisted with the unofficial investigation, acted improperly in their handling of the investigation, which is in contravention of the South African Police Service (SAPS) act and SAPS discipline regulations.

Rhoode is accused of not only failing to report the matter to his national commander and ensuring a docket was opened, but that he also seemed unable to provide evidence to the contrary.

The major-general’s version that he only conducted preliminary investigations and focused on threats to the president were also rejected.

Gcaleka recommended that within 60 days of her final report being produced, appropriate action in line with the SAPS discipline regulations, must be taken against Rhoode.

She also recommended that the police establish an appropriate directive for presidential protection, including instructions, policy and other prescripts under the powers of the national commissioner to guide how the unit must manage crimes involving the high-ranking leaders under their watch.

Gcaleka also refused to get involved on matters which fall outside of her jurisdiction but are the responsibilities of other state institutions. These include issues of compliance with the country’s exchange regulations, which are with within the ambit of the South African Revenue Services (SARS) and the South African Reserve Bank.

Just this week, her office refused to entertain a request from the DA’s John Steenhuisen to include an update from SARS that it has no records showing Sudanese businessman Hazim Mustafa declared the foreign currency, he used at Phala Phala, when he came into the country.

“It is worth mentioning that the jurisdiction of the Public Protector does not provide for powers and methods of collecting evidence from foreign sovereign states. The empowering provisions of the Public Protector have no extra-territorial application or jurisdiction,” she explains.

Gcaleka also did not go into allegations of criminality as investigations of those are withing the scope of the Hawks and the Independent Police Investigative Directorate.

The law enforcement agencies will have to look into allegations of wrongdoing against the SAPS members.

The preliminary report has been handed to the four complainants and the office of the President for comments, before the Public Protector finalises her report.