'Farmgate' could spell disaster for South Africa's ruling party

Dubbed the “Farmgate” scandal, it’s a tale that ­involves substantial sums of cash of anywhere between $580,000 and $5 million stuffed in a sofa, scores of ­buffalo, a Sudanese businessman, a former spy boss and unknown thieves.

The outcome of this story could bring down a presidency and spell disaster for South Africa’s ­ruling African National Congress (ANC) in ­elections in 2024.

At the centre of the turmoil is South ­African president Cyril Ramaphosa, whose political fate will be decided by the ANC in the wake of a damning ­parliamentary report into a scandal over the theft of bundles of cash from his private Phala Phala game farm in the province of Limpopo.

It’s a scandal some say has fatally ­tarnished the image of the trade ­unionist turned businessman who took over the ANC’s leadership five years ago on a ­mission to clean up systemic ­corruption that grew rife under Ramaphosa’s ­predecessor Jacob Zuma.

READ MORE: Musings on art, food and football over a weekend in Naples

In what is a murky affair, it centres on claims that Ramaphosa tried to hide the theft of some $580,000 (£470,000) – and possibly much more – which was stashed down the back of a sofa in his farmhouse in 2020. That has led to questions about where the cash came from. The president says it was generated from the sale of 20 “substandard” buffaloes to a Sudanese businessman on Christmas Day in 2019. The money went in the sofa, he says, ­because it was thought to be safer than the farm’s safe.

However, the buffaloes which Ramaphosa said had been sold remain on his farm, and South Africa has strict rules on holding foreign currency, saying it ­cannot be held for more than 30 days.

Ramaphosa has always denied ­wrongdoing over the Phala Phala robbery, which was revealed two years later when Arthur Fraser, a former head of South ­Africa’s spy agency under Zuma, accused the presidency of covering up a probe into the theft.

It’s a matter of record that after ­learning of the theft, Ramaphosa reported the ­matter to his security protection team, instead of the relevant police department.

A subsequent investigation panel led by a former chief justice concluded in the ­report released last Wednesday that “there was a deliberate decision to keep the investigation secret” and that more cash appeared to have been stored at the farm than the $580,000 that was stolen.

What happens next depends on two things. The first is the outcome of a ­meeting by the country’s National ­Assembly when MPs are due to discuss the panel’s ­findings and whether to go ahead with hearings. The second is from within the ANC itself, whose National ­Executive Committee has now been tasked with ­debating Ramaphosa’s future.

After an initial meeting of the ­committee, ANC treasurer general Paul Mashatile said the group would ­reconvene before December 6 to discuss the report, which will be debated in parliament on that day.

“We want to deal with it properly, we don’t want to miss any step,” Mashatile told reporters, adding that party officials needed to scrutinise the report further.

“The mood was that there is a sense of urgency, that we should resolve these ­issues so that we can go on with the responsibilities of running the country.”

As the threat of impeachment hangs over the president, senior figures whom analysts consider close Ramaphosa allies closed ranks around him on Friday. Others within the party may see this as an opportunity to renew efforts to oust him at the party conference this month.

Two other ministers in Ramaphosa’s cabinet -– Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, ­former president Jacob Zuma’s ex-wife, who narrowly lost the ANC’s 2017 ­leadership contest to Ramaphosa, and tourism minister Lindiwe Sisulu, who has campaigned to be elected ANC ­leader at the coming party conference – have called on the president to step down.

Whatever the outcome, for Ramaphosa himself, the whole affair could not have come at a worse moment for the ANC, just weeks before he was tipped to win re-election as the party’s leader. Already some observers are saying that the issue will seriously hamper the ANC’s chances ahead of elections in 2024.

Whether Ramaphosa survives the ­coming days or not, the “Farmgate” ­scandal has still to run its full course.

Canada

It was back in April 2020 that a gunman posing as a police officer went on a shooting spree in the Canadian province of Nova Scotia. In the wake of Canada’s worst mass shooting, 22 people were confirmed dead, including a pregnant woman, a primary school teacher, a 17-year-old teenager and a police constable.

The killing prompted Canada’s prime minister Justin Trudeau to ban some 1500 makes and models of “military-grade” assault-style firearms and pledged to buy them back from owners. 

“Our goal, over time, is to see the amount of handguns in our communities reduced,” Trudeau said in a news conference at the time.

But now, as the country’s government prepares to launch the first phase of the mandatory buyback, there has been something of a backlash in several provinces and territories from political opposition parties and aggrieved 
gun-owners. 

As the Toronto Star newspaper outlined a few days ago, while Canada’s new gun bill – known as C-21 – started off as a proposed law to institute a handgun freeze and other firearm control measures, last month it grew into something much larger.  

In short, it constituted a law that would lay out an “evergreen definition” of what technical specifications should get a gun banned in Canada and a massive new list specifying which firearms will now be banned.  
The government estimates that there are approximately 150,000 registered firearms in Canada that would be bought back. 

Details about how the buyback will work, however, remain sketchy. Depending on the make and model of the gun, owners could be compensated from between $1000 and $2100, according to a proposed price list.

The Liberal government says most of the newly banned firearms are in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta. But opposition parties and some 
gun-owner groups are not happy at what they see as a much wider ban than was initially proposed. 

While the opposition Conservatives called the move to add provisions via amendments to the bill “sneaky” and an effort to ban nearly every rifle or shotgun in Canada, the New Democrats have called the proposals an “overreach” that came out of nowhere, according to the Toronto Star.  

But some observers say what’s really going on here is just one of several political disputes that’s stirring up tensions between Ottawa and the country’s various provinces, some of whom have long felt “estranged” from the capital and what they see as federal “intrusion”. 

What remains undisputed, though, is that gun control generally has broad support across Canada as homicide rates rise and guns remain the most common weapon used. 

Afghanistan

At the time, there was much talk of a “changed” Taliban. It wasn’t that anyone expected the Islamist- inspired group to suddenly become tolerant and liberal, but just perhaps that they would have learned from their previous mistakes when they ruled Afghanistan from 1996 to 2001. But with every day that passes since retaking power in August last year, evidence shows that far from changing their stripes, the policies of the Taliban are as brutal and out of touch with the modern world as they have ever been.

A dire economic situation, crumbling health system, rising malnutrition, a four-fold increase in already high maternal mortality rates and continuing migration and internal displacement have all led to a worsening plight for Afghans. But it is the curtailment of women’s rights more than anything that is perhaps the greatest cause for concern as the Taliban escalates its public floggings and curbs on women’s participation in public life that characterised its last stint in power. What’s more, far from seeking to cover up such barbarism, only last week, Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, the group’s supreme leader, ordered all officials to implement Sharia law in the country.

The Taliban have not detailed the specific offences and punishments, but a religious authority in Afghanistan informed the media that, in accordance with Sharia law, punishments might include stoning, public whipping and amputation.

Afghan women are subject to brutal treatment (Image: Newsquest)

As UN officials recently pointed out, the latest actions by the Taliban authorities targeting women and girls have only deepened existing flagrant violations of their human rights and freedoms that are already the most draconian globally and may amount to gender persecution, a crime against humanity.

In a statement released by the international body, it said that violations have sharply increased, with girls remaining excluded from secondary education, women further prevented from entering public places such as parks and gyms, and in at least one region, young women were recently blocked from entering their university. “Banning women’s access to parks also denies children the opportunity for leisure and exercise and their right to engage in play and recreational activities. Confining women to their homes is tantamount to imprisonment and is likely leading to increased levels of domestic violence and mental health challenges,” the statement added.

Dozens of women were among a number of people publicly lashed recently in front of thousands of onlookers at a football stadium in the country after being deemed guilty of “moral crimes”.

One eyewitness told the German public, state-owned international broadcaster Deutsche Welle that the Taliban used a special whip “made of leather and metal”. He added that the people who were whipped were in extreme pain and were crying for help.

Writing on Twitter, Rina Amiri, the US special representative for Afghan women, said that the punishments were “both appalling and a dangerous sign that the Taliban are becoming more defiant in showing the world that they are embracing the policies of the past.”

“It didn’t end up well before and it will once again take the country on a perilous path,” Amiri added.

China

Many of us will already be familiar with George Orwell’s novel 1984 and its depiction of life under a fictional totalitarian regime where state surveillance is everywhere. 

Most of us, too, probably already realise that such states exist in reality. If ever there was need of a reminder of that, then look no further than events in China these past weeks.  

There, the authorities have turned yet again to powerful tools of surveillance which the state has spent the past decade building for moments like this, when sections of the population turn out and question the authority of the ruling Chinese Communist Party. 

Ostensibly, the protests in China have been about demanding a release from a zero-Covid policy and lockdowns, but at the heart of the challenge to the regime is a cry for wider freedoms. In response, the “all-seeing” surveillance power of the state has been brought to bear using a vast security apparatus.   

“In Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, police have seemingly used very high-tech methods,” said Wang Shengsheng, a lawyer based in Zhengzhou who is providing legal support to protesters.  

She is in touch with at least 15 people who have been summoned by local police. Protesters told her that they had received calls from police officers who said they knew their whereabouts during protests and asked them to come in for questioning. She said she suspected police were using data from mobile phones and social media accounts to track down protesters. 
“In other cities, it seems like they have relied on surveillance footage and facial recognition,” Wang said. 

For years now, the Chinese police have assembled one of the world’s most sophisticated surveillance systems. Millions of cameras have been installed on street corners and at the entrance to buildings. Special software processes the data and images that are scooped up. Perhaps one of the most sinister aspects of such an expansion of surveillance is the way the authorities have enhanced their capabilities over the past two years as part of Covid contact-tracing efforts. 

“These technologies, which were supposed to facilitate anti-Covid efforts, turned into shackles being put on us,” Wang told journalists. 

But just as the authorities unleash their vast array of surveillance measures, so too have protesters responded, operating beyond China’s censorship firewall. From social media groups swapping ideas for moving around in smaller clusters, to using multiple phones, and figuring out how to track and share information about the movements of police, the protesters are deploying their own surveillance. One can only guess at what Orwell would have made of that.