Information Regulator gives no timeline for ActionSA’s Phala Phala complaint decision

The Information Regulator has confirmed receipt of ActionSA’s complaint over the South African Police Service’s refusal to release documents linked to the Phala Phala matter under the Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA), but it cannot say when a decision will be made or whether SAPS was justified in withholding the records.

Complaint lodged and timeline unclear

The regulator’s Senior Manager for Communication and Media, Nomzamo Zondi, said the office received the complaint on 18 June 2026. Asked how long adjudication would take, she said the matter remains under assessment and the regulator “cannot make a determination of how long it will take.”

Zondi added that while straightforward complaints are generally finalised within three months, “more complex matters can take up to 12 months.” She declined to give a preliminary view on whether SAPS’s reliance on pending criminal and civil proceedings constituted valid grounds to refuse access under PAIA, saying “the matter is under assessment, and we cannot make a preliminary view on it.”

What ActionSA asked for

ActionSA’s PAIA application, filed in early June, requested access to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s affidavit relating to the 2020 theft of foreign currency from his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo, and a National Prosecuting Authority cash flow analysis. ActionSA says the financial analysis links approximately R15 million in transactions to one of the accused, a figure it says is higher than the R8.7 million initially reported stolen.

SAPS refused the request on the basis that the records form part of ongoing criminal and civil proceedings. ActionSA has challenged that explanation, saying its request was not made for the purposes of either proceeding, and has accused SAPS of relying on incorrect legal provisions. After an internal appeal failed, ActionSA escalated the dispute to the Information Regulator.

Regulator has not handled similar Phala Phala PAIA disputes

The regulator confirmed it has not previously handled comparable PAIA disputes arising from the Phala Phala matter, including ActionSA’s earlier PAIA application for the Independent Police Investigative Directorate’s (IPID) report into the alleged cover-up of the theft. When asked whether the office had dealt with similar applications before, Zondi said, “No, we have not.”

Background: IPID report and further access requests

ActionSA obtained the previously classified “Top Secret” IPID report in April. The report recommended disciplinary action against Major General Wally Rhoode and a constable attached to the Presidential Protection Services Unit over allegations that they concealed the theft and falsified official documents. ActionSA has questioned why internal SAPS disciplinary processes cleared both officials despite IPID’s findings and has submitted further PAIA applications seeking records of those disciplinary proceedings.

Other bodies decline comment

The National Prosecuting Authority declined to comment, with spokesperson Kaizer Kganyago saying,

“We are unable to comment as the matter is before court,”

and citing the sub judice rule.

The Information Regulator declined to add further comment when asked whether it wished to place anything else on record.