GAUTENG – ActionSA has filed papers in the North Gauteng High Court against the South African Police Service (SAPS), challenging the outcome of disciplinary hearings that cleared two Presidential Protection Service (PPS) members of wrongdoing in connection with the Phala Phala matter.

The application targets General Wally Rhoode and Constable Hennie Rekhoto, both of whom were found free of any wrongdoing in internal SAPS disciplinary proceedings.

ActionSA announced its intention to pursue legal action on 17 July, following what it described as a protracted process to obtain the disciplinary records.

ActionSA National Chairperson Michael Beaumont said in a statement that the party obtained the records of decision for the disciplinary hearings and found that they were only four and two pages respectively. The records reportedly showed no evidence of witnesses being called or evidence being presented. Neither the Public Protector nor the Independent Police Investigating Directorate (IPID) participated in the disciplinary process, despite both institutions having made findings against Rhoode and Rekhoto.

The party said none of the offences identified by IPID were included in the charge sheet.

“It was only after taking legal action against the Police Minister that ActionSA was able to
have the IPID investigation declassified from its questionable “Top Secret” classification and
made available to the South African people,” Beaumont said.

ActionSA said it only secured access to the IPID investigation after taking legal action against the Police Minister, which led to the report being declassified from its “Top Secret” classification.

Two-part court application

The court application is structured in two parts. The first is a Rule 53 application seeking disclosure of records and documents related to the disciplinary process.

Among the information sought are compliance reports submitted to the Public Protector and IPID, the full record of decision, further investigations conducted by SAPS, the 2023 statement by Constable Rekhoto that was deemed inadmissible in the 2024 disciplinary hearing, charge sheets and evidence led, the record of appointments of presiding officers — including a Brigadier in the PPS who presided over Rekhoto’s hearing — and the 2020 Incident Book in which General Rhoode allegedly recorded the robbery, which ActionSA says was removed from storage and held in his custody unsupervised at the time of the IPID investigation.

The second part of the application, to follow once the records are obtained, will seek to challenge the decision to absolve Rhoode and Rekhoto and compel SAPS to conduct new disciplinary processes.

Legal grounds for ‘David vs Goliath battle’

ActionSA’s legal case rests on Section 182(1)(c) of the Constitution, which deems findings of the Public Protector to be binding in law, and Section 30(c) of the IPID Act, which obliges SAPS to initiate disciplinary proceedings in line with IPID recommendations and report on the institution and outcome of those proceedings.

Beaumont said the disciplinary process was “a sham to protect those who broke the law to protect the President for his breaking of the law.

“ActionSA will continue fighting this David vs Goliath battle for the South African people from
the opposition benches of a parliament where most parties have been silenced by their
complicity in a GNU that depends on President Ramaphosa never facing accountability,” he added.

The party said it was confident the application would be granted, citing previous court rulings affirming the right to public interest information where respondents have shown a pattern of obstructive behaviour.

ALSO READ: Ramaphosa impeachment inquiry stalls as committee seeks legal advice on evidence leader