A classified report by the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (Ipid), completed in 2023 and recently obtained through a Promotion of Access to Information Act request, has laid bare a deeply troubling chain of events surrounding the 2020 theft of approximately $580,000 — roughly R9-million — at President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm. The report paints a picture of an unlawful, off-the-books investigation conducted by senior members of the Presidential Protection Service (PPS), with state resources allegedly abused and legal obligations ignored at every turn. The Phala Phala farm theft saga, which has haunted Ramaphosa’s presidency for years, now has a fresh and damaging chapter.
At the centre of Ipid’s findings are two officers: Major General Wally Rhoode, head of the Presidential Protection Service, and Constable Hlulani Rekhoto. The watchdog found “information of evidential value” that both men breached police rules and their legal obligations. Ipid has recommended that disciplinary action be taken against both officers for a range of violations — a recommendation that carries serious weight given the seniority of those implicated.
What makes the report particularly explosive is not just what was done, but what was deliberately left undone. Rhoode was informed by Ramaphosa in 2020 that money from the sale of animals had gone missing from his farm. Instead of reporting the crime as legally required under Section 13(2) of the SAPS Act 68 of 1995, Rhoode launched what Ipid describes as an “unlawful investigation without any case docket or inquiry file registered on CAS with a case number of a specific police station.” In other words, a criminal matter involving the President of the Republic was handled entirely outside of official police channels.
Rhoode should have reported the matter to the then National Commissioner General Khehla Sitole. Instead, he claimed to have flagged it to the late Lieutenant General Sindile Mfazi, who allegedly gave him the go-ahead to proceed. Sitole, it appears, knew nothing about it. Rhoode himself later admitted to Ipid that conducting criminal investigations was beyond the scope of his role — yet he pushed on regardless.
Phala Phala Farm Theft Cover-Up: What the Ipid Report Reveals About Police Misconduct
The unlawful investigation took some deeply disturbing turns. In March 2020, Rhoode interviewed two alleged suspects, Floriana Joseph and David Joseph, in connection with the Phala Phala farm theft. During that interview, a man identified only as Nick arrived with another suspect named Thomas — whose hands were bound behind his back with cable ties. Ipid drew a clear inference: Nick was part of a team assembled by Rhoode to track and trace suspects, pointing to what the report describes as the unlawful apprehension and interrogation of individuals.
The paper trail only gets worse from there. On 7 March 2020, Rhoode submitted a request to send Constable Rekhoto and a driver from Pretoria to Cape Town, falsely recording the purpose of the trip as official meetings with the Presidency. In reality, Rekhoto had received a tip-off from David Joseph — described as his alleged source — that Phala Phala suspects were in Cape Town. The Cape Town trip, which lasted eight days during the height of the Covid-19 pandemic, was approved on entirely false pretences. Ipid found that Rekhoto was fully aware a crime had been committed, actively participated in the investigation alongside Rhoode, and then lied about the meetings he claimed to have attended.
Ipid also found that Rhoode abused state resources in ways that amounted to fruitless and wasteful expenditure. Between 7 and 13 March 2020, he had his Pretoria-based driver Jabu Mahlangu flown to Cape Town to perform driving duties, despite local staff being available. He repeated this pattern between 24 and 28 June 2020, this time sending a warrant officer from Cape Town to Pretoria and then to Upington to serve as his driver. “This conduct by Major General WP Rhoode amounts to Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure,” the report states plainly.
Adding yet another layer to the scandal, Ipid found that Rhoode travelled to Upington en route to Namibia and stayed at the Schroderhuis Guest House alongside presidential advisor and Africa envoy Dr Bejani Chauke — using a state vehicle. Critically, Chauke’s expenses were not included in any submission to Sitole for approval. According to Sitole, Chauke is not permitted to use SAPS VIP Unit resources under the Policy on Risk Management System, and should instead have drawn from the Presidential budget unless specifically directed otherwise. The Presidential spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, pushed back on this point, referencing the Public Protector’s earlier finding that no direct link could be established between Chauke’s Namibia trip and the PPS investigation at Phala Phala.
Notably, Ipid made no formal findings or recommendations against President Ramaphosa himself, nor against Chauke. But opposition parties aren’t letting that omission slide quietly. ATM’s Vuyo Zungula, one of the original complainants in the matter, has called for the President to be held directly accountable. “The political heads that gave an unlawful instruction that culminated in Rhoode taking part in an illegal investigation, torturing people, abusing state resources, must take responsibility — and that person is President Ramaphosa,” Zungula said. ActionSA, which fought for the report’s public release, echoed that sentiment, stating that both SAPS leadership and the President must now account for their failure to act against Rhoode, Rekhoto, and Chauke.
One of the most telling details buried in the report is a pattern Ipid identified throughout its investigation: “Major General WP Rhoode name-dropped the President’s name every time he conducted his unauthorised investigations into the Phala Phala farm theft. Whenever he completed itineraries, he would use the President’s name so that he could not be asked questions.” That is a remarkable finding — one that suggests Ramaphosa’s name was wielded as a shield to deflect scrutiny from an entirely irregular operation.
The roots of this saga stretch back to June 2022, when former correctional services commissioner Arthur Fraser filed a criminal complaint alleging that Ramaphosa had concealed the theft of millions of dollars hidden in furniture at Phala Phala. Fraser put the stolen amount at $4-million, far exceeding the figure Ramaphosa later acknowledged. The ensuing political storm led to the appointment of an independent panel under Section 89 of the Constitution, which found prima facie evidence that Ramaphosa may have acted inconsistently with his office. When the panel’s report was tabled in Parliament in December 2022, 214 ANC MPs voted against its adoption, effectively shutting down any impeachment inquiry. Ramaphosa survived — but the matter refused to die.
Both the ATM and EFF took the matter to the Constitutional Court over a year ago, and the Office of the Chief Justice has now confirmed that judgment is expected within a month. With the Ipid report now public and disciplinary recommendations firmly on the table, the political and legal pressure on Ramaphosa is intensifying once more. The question South Africans are asking is no longer simply what happened at Phala Phala — it’s who authorised the cover-up, and whether anyone powerful enough to be held responsible will finally face real consequences.