PHALA PHALA SCANDAL: Ramaphosa says he’ll ‘suffer irreparable harm’ if impeachment process continues before court review

Thirteen months into the trial over the theft of at least $580,000 from President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm, lawyers of the three accused say they remain confident of being acquitted, arguing that the State has failed to produce direct evidence linking them to the burglary.

With both the State and defence having closed their cases, the prosecution has until Friday, 3 July, to file written heads of argument. The defence will then have 15 days to respond before oral arguments are heard in August.

At the heart of the defence’s case is the argument that prosecutors are relying on circumstantial evidence including cellphone records, financial transactions and witness testimony – rather than direct proof that any of the accused took part in the theft.

“The State’s case is weak. We are standing on our application for discharge simply because the State is relying on circumstantial evidence,” said Koena Matlala, who represents first accused Imanuwela David.

David, together with siblings Floriana and Ndilinasho Joseph, is accused of carrying out the burglary at the Limpopo game farm in February 2020.

The State alleges that Floriana Joseph, who was employed as a cleaner at the farm, discovered the wads of cash hidden inside a couch and alerted her brother, Ndilinasho, who then allegedly informed David, whom the State has described as the mastermind of the burglary.

The three Namibian nationals face charges of conspiracy to commit housebreaking with intent to steal and theft, as well as two counts of housebreaking with intent to steal and theft. David also faces a money laundering charge.

Following the money

(From left) Imanuwela David (39) and Froliana Joseph (30) appear at Bela-Bela Magistrate’s Court on 7 November 2023 in connection with the robbery at President Cyril Ramaphosa's Phala Phala farm in 2020. Along with Joseph’s brother, Ndilinasho, they have been charged with theft, housebreaking with intent to steal, conspiracy to commit robbery, conspiracy to commit housebreaking with intent to steal. (Photo: Deaan Vivier / Beeld / Gallo Images) Throughout the trial, the State sought to build its case using cellphone evidence, financial records and witness testimony relating to David’s spending patterns after the burglary.

The court heard from a financial analyst, who testified that David’s bank account activity surged from about R126,000 in 2019 to more than R3-million in 2020, after the theft. That evidence supported what the State has maintained – that David’s lifestyle “dramatically” changed after the burglary.

During the State’s case, the court heard that David spent more than R5-million on a fleet of luxury vehicles, including one he bought for his “baby mama”.

Evidence presented in court also showed that he spent R250,000 on custom-made dental grills, R70,000 on adding diamonds to his Rolex watch, and R1-million on a property in Rustenburg, North West.

David has denied that any of the money originated from the Phala Phala burglary.

Instead, he testified that he operated several legitimate businesses, including a logistics company and a motor spares business that continued operating as an essential service during the Covid-19 lockdown. He also told the court that he sourced vehicles for clients in Malawi and earned substantial commissions from those transactions.

Defence attacks cellphone evidence

The State has relied heavily on testimony from a cellphone analyst, who placed the accused in the same general areas before and after the burglary and identified numerous calls between the phones linked to them.

Matlala argued that the evidence established little more than proximity.

According to the defence, cellphone tower records indicate only that a device was within the coverage area of a particular tower and do not place a person at a specific location.

He further argued that network congestion and technological limitations can result in phones connecting to towers outside their immediate vicinity.

David has also offered alternative explanations for his presence in the area around the time of the burglary.

He testified that he has family ties to a village near Phala Phala, owns a house in the area and had travelled there for personal reasons. He also claimed he intended attending a car show in Bela-Bela, Limpopo, and had been visiting relatives, including his mother in Rustenburg.

No case to answer – Joseph siblings

(From left) Ndilinasho Joseph, Floriana Joseph and Imanuwela David in the dock. (Photo: Nonkululeko Njilo) For advocate Relleng Masipa, who represents the Joseph siblings, the State’s case is even weaker.

“From where we’re standing insofar as our clients are concerned, the State has not proven a case against our clients,” he said.

Masipa has maintained this position throughout the trial and previously made unsuccessful attempts to have the charges withdrawn.

Most recently, he joined a Section 174 application brought by the defence, arguing that the State had failed to present sufficient evid…