‘Everyone knows money was in the couch’: MPs criticise IPID and SAPS over Phala Phala handling

Parliament grills police watchdog and SAPS over Phala Phala saga

Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Police subjected the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) and the South African Police Service (SAPS) to sharp questioning on 13 May 2026 over their handling of the Phala Phala matter, a high-profile case that began with the theft of $580,000 from President Cyril Ramaphosa’s game farm on 9 February 2020.

What IPID told MPs

IPID’s head of investigations, Thuso Keefelakae, said the watchdog’s probe was finalised in October 2023 and the report was declassified in April 2026. The inquiry followed a complaint lodged in July 2022 after former SSA head Arthur Fraser laid criminal charges related to the incident.

The IPID report found that Wally Rhoode, head of the Presidential Protection Service, did not report the crime to then-national police commissioner Khehla Sithole and failed to open a case docket for housebreaking and theft. Evidence indicated Rhoode’s involvement in the alleged kidnapping and interrogation of farm employee Froliana Joseph and her brother Ndilinasho David Joseph, and noted a trip by Rhoode to Namibia in June 2020 as part of efforts to find the siblings.

IPID further reported that Sergeant Hlulani Rekhoto had been instructed by Rhoode to trace other suspects in Cape Town. The watchdog said it could not reach adverse findings on some aspects of the Namibia trip, that a kidnapping case opened by the alleged victims in August 2022 was later withdrawn, and that claims of bribery could not be substantiated.

Hawks and prosecutions

Siphosethu Nkosi, deputy national head of the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (the Hawks), told MPs that criminal proceedings relating to the original housebreaking and theft are ongoing. He also confirmed an investigation into possible violations of customs and excise laws connected to the undeclared cash.

Nkosi said a money laundering case tied to exchange control regulations was dropped after the Director of Public Prosecutions declined to prosecute. On the allegations of kidnapping, torture and assault, he said the alleged victims had withdrawn their statements.

Disciplinary outcomes and ministerial role

Despite recommendations for disciplinary action from IPID and the Public Protector, Rhoode and Rekhoto were cleared in internal SAPS proceedings in early 2024, a result that drew concern from committee members.

Acting Police Minister Firoz Cachalia told MPs he had no role in IPID’s classification or declassification processes and that IPID had not sought his advice or intervention.

MPs press for answers

Committee members voiced frustration with both the investigative findings and how the processes were handled.

“That’s a big question I’m asking myself. We have seen this countless times where someone is found to be guilty on one side, but it goes to SAPS for an internal investigation, and a hearing finds them not guilty. So, it’s a huge issue,”

“It could be because of corruption that they don’t register a case because they are covering for somebody,”

“Today, it has shown beyond reasonable doubt that they are closing ranks. They are covering up one of their own. This issue of independence does not exist here,”

Questions about evidence “Waar is die couch?”

ActionSA MP Dereleen James focused on physical evidence, asking about the couch in which the cash was found and whether it was ever logged as exhibit evidence. James asked why there were no pictures or public detail about the couch and whether the crime scene had been properly processed.

She asked directly, “Waar is die couch?”

EFF MP Muzi Khoza pressed officials for clarity on the specific evidentiary or procedural reasons that had led to Rhoode’s and Rekhoto’s exoneration in the SAPS disciplinary process.

What remains

The committee’s session underscored lingering questions about investigative decisions, internal disciplinary outcomes and the handling of evidence. MPs said the proceedings highlighted concerns about accountability and the independence of state institutions tasked with probing police conduct.

Where to see the proceedings

The Portfolio Committee meeting, during which these updates and exchanges took place, was made available for viewing by MPs and the public.