Serious allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa

Political commentator Prince Mashele has said that Cyril Ramaphosa cannot act against Senzo Mchunu because of the former Police Minister’s relationship to the President’s campaign in 2017.

This follows Ramaphosa placing Mchunu on gardening leave despite being accused by Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi of colluding with criminals to disband the Political Killings Task Team.

“Ramaphosa cannot take stern action against Mchunu. Why? Because the two are partners in crime,” Mashele said on the SMWX podacast.

“When Ramaphosa became president of the African National Congress (ANC) in 2017, Mchunu was the chief campaigner of the Cyril Ramaphosa 2017 (CR17) campaign in KwaZulu-Natal,” said the Executive Director of the Centre for Politics and Research.

Newsday has reached out to the Presidency for comment regarding these claims.

Jacob Zuma won a second and final term as ANC party president in 2012, and numerous candidates were eager to replace him.

Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa and Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, Zuma’s former wife, were the two candidates running for the ANC’s top spot.

Ramaphosa narrowly won the election at the party’s 54th National Congress in December 2017, 2,440 votes to 2,261.

A year later, during a question session in Parliament, the President was asked by then Democratic Alliance (DA) leader Mmusi Maimane about a R500,000 payment that his son had allegedly received from the CEO of Bosasa, Gavin Watson.

Bosasa, a company that provided services to government departments, is a now-defunct company with scandals involving allegations of corruption, bribery, and state capture.

It was exposed mainly through the Zondo Commission, where the company exposed its close ties to senior officials, politicians, and the ANC.

At first, Ramaphosa said that the money was paid to his son for financial consultancy services provided to the company.

He argued that the money had come to his attention “some time ago” and said that he had asked his son “at close range whether the money was obtained illegally or unlawfully- and he said this was for a service provided.”

However, ten days later, the President wrote to the Speaker of the National Assembly, saying that he had inadvertently provided incorrect information about the funds.

He said that although his son did have a contract with Bosasa, the money did not relate to this and was instead used for his campaign to run for ANC President, a donation he was not aware of when answering the question.

“So all the dirty money that Cyril Ramaphosa collected from Bosasa, and so on, the person responsible for handling that money was Mchunu,” Mashele said.

“That’s why the President will never seriously confront these allegations against Mchunu. They have actually sat somewhere and said, ‘How do we deal with this situation without me injuring you?’”

The report

Following several complaints about Ramaphosa’s U-turn on the question, the former Public Protector, Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane, launched an investigation.

The report found that Ramaphosa had violating the Code by “deliberately misleading Parliament” as he should have given himself enough time to research the matter.

It also found that the investigation substantiated the claim that Ramaphosa exposed himself to a situation involving the risk of conflict between his official duties and personal interests or used his position to enrich himself and his son.

“It can be safely argued that the pledges towards the CR17 campaign were some form of sponsorship and that they were direct financial sponsorship or assistance from non-party sources other than a party member or permanent companion,” it said.

The money was therefore seen as “benefits of material nature to President Ramaphosa.”

High Court decision

In early 2020, the Pretoria High Court set aside the Public Protector’s decision to investigate and report on the CR17 campaign.

The court found that no donation had benefited the President in his personal capacity, as he did not receive any of the money from the campaign.

It also found that Ramaphosa did not defy the Executive Ethics Code, as it requires the disclosure of a financial interest. The R500,000 donation was classified as a political benefit.

The Public Protector appealed the decision to the Constitutional Court, which was ultimately upheld, as the majority believed that the President did not benefit from the donation.

Mkhwanazi’s allegations

Fast-forward to July 2025, and the KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner General Lieutenant Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi has made several allegations that a criminal syndicate has captured South Africa’s law enforcement and intelligence structures.

Among Mkhwanzi’s allegations was that Police Minister Senzo Mchunu had colluded with criminals, including tenderpreneur and murder-accused Vusi “Cat” Matlala, to disband the Political Killings Task Team in KwaZulu-Natal.

Mchunu denied these allegations, but was placed on a special leave of absence pending the investigation.

Ramaphosa was in Brazil during Mkhwanazi’s press briefing, attending a BRICS summit. Upon his return, he addressed the nation about how the executive would deal with Mkhwanazi’s claims.

In addition to announcing a commission of inquiry to investigate the allegations, Ramaphosa announced that Mchunu would be placed on a special leave of absence while remaining a Member of Parliament (MP).

The fact that Mchunu was suspended but not removed from his position sparked widespread criticism across South Africa, with the MK party even challenging the decision in the Constitutional Court.

Mashele goes on to argue that there is “no way” that the intelligence on which Mkhwanazi based his allegations was unknown to the President.

“I have worked in government myself. The President is client number one of our intelligence services. The President is supposed to get intelligence briefings every morning,” said Mashele.

“Before he begins his morning, he is supposed to be told what is happening in the country. So there is nothing Mkhwanazi knows that Cyril Ramaphosa does not know. In fact, the President knows more.”