ActionSA challenges SAPS over ‘flawed’ clearing of Phala Phala officers
ActionSA challenges SAPS over ‘flawed’ clearing of Phala Phala officers after the political party announced plans to approach the High Court over the disciplinary findings involving two senior police officials linked to the investigation into the 2020 Phala Phala farm burglary.
The ActionSA says the South African Police Service (SAPS) disciplinary process involving Major General Wally Rhoode and Brigadier Hennie Rekhoto raises serious questions about how evidence was considered and whether previous findings by independent oversight bodies were properly taken into account.
The party says it wants the disciplinary findings reviewed and set aside, arguing that the process did not adequately address evidence and conclusions previously produced by the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) and the Public Protector.
ActionSA takes SAPS to court
ActionSA has instructed its legal representatives to institute proceedings in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Pretoria.
The legal challenge seeks to review and set aside the SAPS disciplinary findings relating to Wally Rhoode and Rekhoto, who were investigated over their conduct during the handling of the Phala Phala burglary investigation.
ActionSA’s challenge follows its examination of disciplinary records obtained through a Promotion of Access to Information Act request.
The party says the documents raise questions about whether the internal disciplinary process was sufficiently thorough.
According to ActionSA, the record of decision for one matter was only four pages long, while the other was two pages.
The party argues that the records contain little evidence of a comprehensive examination of competing evidence, witnesses or the issues previously raised by oversight institutions.
SABC News reported that ActionSA questioned whether six pages of records could adequately demonstrate that a proper disciplinary process had taken place.
What ActionSA wants from the court
The party wants the High Court to examine whether the disciplinary proceedings were procedurally proper and whether the conclusions reached were rationally connected to the evidence presented.
If the court agrees with ActionSA’s arguments, the party wants the disciplinary findings set aside and the matter reconsidered through a new process.
It has also sought access to the complete disciplinary record.
Importantly, ActionSA’s allegations are contested political and legal claims rather than findings that the court has already upheld.
The court will ultimately have to determine whether the disciplinary process complied with the applicable legal requirements.
SAPS disciplinary findings under scrutiny
The dispute centres on the internal disciplinary process involving Rhoode and Rekhoto.
Both officers were investigated over their conduct relating to the police response to the burglary at President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm.
The matter has attracted significant attention because previous investigations by IPID and the Public Protector reached conclusions that ActionSA says are difficult to reconcile with the later SAPS disciplinary outcome.
According to SABC News, IPID recommended disciplinary action against Rhoode and Rekhoto after finding that the theft had not been reported through official police channels and that state resources had been used in an unauthorised investigation.
The Public Protector also made findings relating to the conduct of members of the Presidential Protection Service.
Rhoode and Rekhoto were cleared
The internal SAPS disciplinary proceedings ultimately found the two officers not guilty of misconduct.
Police Minister Firoz Cachalia later told Parliament that disciplinary proceedings had been conducted and that both Rhoode and Rekhoto were found not guilty after the processes were concluded.
Cachalia maintained that the investigations had considered the recommendations of the Public Protector and subsequently incorporated IPID’s findings.
That position differs sharply from ActionSA’s interpretation.
The party argues that the internal process did not properly engage with the evidence and conclusions produced by the independent oversight bodies.
Phala Phala scandal remains politically significant
The Phala Phala scandal dates back to a burglary at Ramaphosa’s Limpopo farm in February 2020, during which a substantial amount of foreign currency was stolen.
The incident became a major political controversy after allegations emerged concerning how the burglary was handled and whether the police investigation followed proper procedures.
Rhoode, who headed the Presidential Protection Service, became a central figure in questions surrounding the police response.
IPID’s investigation later recommended disciplinary action against Rhoode and Rekhoto.
The declassified IPID report said the investigation found that the officers should face disciplinary steps over their conduct.
IPID findings add pressure
The IPID findings have become an important part of ActionSA’s legal argument.
SABC News reported that IPID found evidence that the 2020 theft was not reported through official police channels and that state resources were used during an unauthorised investigation.
ActionSA argues that the subsequent SAPS disciplinary findings should have dealt meaningfully with these conclusions.
The party’s position is that simply reaching a different conclusion from IPID and the Public Protector requires a clear and convincing explanation supported by the evidence.
That is one of the central issues it wants the High Court to examine.
Parliament also examines the matter
The dispute is unfolding alongside parliamentary scrutiny of the Phala Phala scandal.
Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Police previously engaged with SAPS and IPID over the handling of the burglary and the subsequent investigation conducted by the Presidential Protection Unit.
The committee has sought clarity on the different findings and the conduct of the officers involved.
Parliament has also considered how the Phala Phala matter relates to other oversight processes, including the Section 89 impeachment inquiry involving the president.
In July, the Section 89 Committee agreed to consider fresh evidence submitted by ActionSA relating to the disciplinary proceedings involving Rhoode and Rekhoto.
Why the disciplinary record matters
The disciplinary record could become important evidence because it provides insight into how SAPS handled the allegations internally.
ActionSA believes the short records it received do not demonstrate that witnesses and competing evidence were adequately tested.
The party also questions whether the disciplinary findings properly addressed the recommendations made by independent oversight institutions.
The issue is therefore not simply whether Rhoode and Rekhoto were found guilty or not guilty.
It also concerns the process used to reach that conclusion.
ActionSA wants accountability
For ActionSA, the court challenge is part of a broader campaign for accountability over the Phala Phala matter.
The party has repeatedly called for the findings of IPID and the Public Protector to be acted upon.
It argues that state institutions cannot reach contradictory conclusions on serious allegations without explaining why earlier findings should be rejected.
ActionSA national chairperson Michael Beaumont has described the SAPS disciplinary outcome in extremely critical terms, while the party has said its legal action is intended to test whether the process was lawful and rational.
SAPS position remains important
SAPS and government officials have defended the internal disciplinary process.
Cachalia said the disciplinary investigations had taken into account the Public Protector’s recommendations and later IPID findings.
This means the forthcoming legal challenge could require the court to examine competing interpretations of the same underlying evidence.
The court will need to determine whether the disciplinary process complied with the relevant rules and whether the findings were properly supported.
YOU MAY LIKE:
What happens next?
The legal challenge could bring renewed attention to the Phala Phala scandal and the conduct of officials involved in the police investigation.
If ActionSA succeeds, the disciplinary findings could be reviewed and potentially sent back for reconsideration.
If the challenge fails, the SAPS disciplinary outcome clearing Rhoode and Rekhoto would remain in place unless another legal or parliamentary process changes the position.
For now, the dispute highlights continuing disagreements between political parties, police authorities and independent oversight institutions over how the Phala Phala investigation was handled.
ActionSA challenges SAPS over ‘flawed’ clearing of Phala Phala officers because the party believes the internal disciplinary process failed to properly account for earlier findings.
The High Court will ultimately have to determine whether those allegations have merit.
Until then, the claims made by ActionSA should be distinguished from established court findings, while the Public Protector and IPID reports remain important pieces of the broader Phala Phala accountability debate.
Mainstream media references
- SABC News — ActionSA to challenge SAPS clearing of Rhoode, Rikhotso
Read the SABC News report - Daily Maverick — ActionSA to take SAPS to court over Phala Phala disciplinary findings
Read the Daily Maverick report - Polity — ActionSA files court bid over Phala Phala police findings
Read the Polity report - SABC News — IPID recommends disciplinary action against two SAPS members
Read the SABC News report
Support Independent Journalism with eKayNews! 📰✨
At eKayNews, we are dedicated to bringing you honest, independent, and reliable news. But we can’t do it alone—independent journalism relies on the strength and generosity of its community.
If you value our work, please consider supporting us today! You can help keep us going by choosing a subscription or simply buying us a one-off virtual coffee:
👉 Support us here: ekaynews.co.za/subscribe-form/
You can also support our mission by visiting our main site at www.ekaynews.co.za and following @eKayNews on all social media platforms.
Thank you so much for your incredible generosity and for being part of our journey! 🙏💙
