What Is the Farmgate Scandal?
The Farmgate scandal centres on events that took place at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo province, where a substantial sum of foreign currency was allegedly stolen in February 2020. According to testimony and investigative reports, approximately $580,000 in cash was taken from a sofa at the presidential residence by a group of intruders. Rather than reporting the theft through official police channels, Ramaphosa allegedly enlisted the services of a close associate and members of the Presidential Protection Unit to investigate the matter privately, raising serious questions about the source of the funds, the reasons for holding such a large amount of foreign currency on a private property, and the apparent circumvention of standard law enforcement procedures.
The scandal first burst into public view in June 2022 when former State Security Agency director Arthur Fraser laid criminal charges against Ramaphosa, accusing the president of kidnapping, money laundering, and concealing a crime. Fraser alleged that the suspects who stole the money were tracked down, detained illegally, and paid hush money to keep the incident quiet. Ramaphosa has consistently denied any wrongdoing, characterising the money as proceeds from the legitimate sale of game animals and insisting that he reported the matter to the head of his protection unit. However, the discrepancy between the reported amounts, the unusual method of handling the investigation, and the president’s evolving explanations have fuelled persistent public suspicion.
The Constitutional Court’s Landmark Ruling
The Constitutional Court’s decision last week to revive impeachment proceedings marks a pivotal moment in the Farmgate saga and in South African constitutional jurisprudence more broadly. The court ruled that parliament had failed in its constitutional duty to properly investigate the allegations against Ramaphosa when the matter was first referred
Global Affairs Review | May 2026
to an independent panel in 2022. That panel, chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, had initially found that Ramaphosa had a case to answer, but the parliamentary vote on the panel’s report was defeated along party lines, with the African National Congress (ANC) using its majority to shield the president from further scrutiny.
The court’s ruling unequivocally stated that parliament cannot simply vote to dismiss findings of an independent panel without conducting its own substantive investigation. In a unanimous decision, the justices held that the constitutional obligation to hold the president accountable is not discharged by a procedural vote but requires a genuine, good-faith inquiry into the merits of the allegations. This interpretation significantly strengthens the framework for presidential accountability in South Africa and establishes an important precedent: parliamentary majorities cannot be used as a shield against legitimate investigations into executive misconduct. The court ordered parliament to establish a proper impeachment committee with the power to summon witnesses, demand documents, and make binding recommendations.
