The ConCourt rules that Ramaphosa did not willfully mislead Parliament.
LIVE BLOG: ConCourt rules Ramaphosa did not wilfully mislead Parly on CR17 campaign
The Constitutional Court hands down its judgment on the case involving Cyril Ramaphosa's campaign for the ANC presidency.
Justice Jafta says Mkhwebane changed the wording of a paragraph to include that Ramaphosa deliberately misled Parliament. On the basis on the changed quote, she concluded he deliberately misled Parliament because he did not give a well-informed response. Jafta says she was wrong in doing this, What she did went beyond parameters of interpretation. He says he cannot inadvertently and deliberately mislead. Therefore, she was wrong on the info and law.
Mkhwebane also found that Ramaphosa used his position to solicit funds, but this was not within her jurisdiction to investigate, sats Justice Jafta. She proceeded to find on whether he personally benefitted and concluded that by failing to declare, he breached Paragraph 2 of the Ethics Code, which was also not within the scope of the probe.
Mkhwebane had also requested bank records from the account where the R500k was deposited into. She received the account details. R190 million was deposited into the account in total, which was then disbursed to accounts such as the Ramaphosa Foundation.
Emails were anonymously delivered to her office but she couldn't verify the authenticity of them. Ramah
Ramaphosa disputed that he was obliged to disclose the duties. He also said the donations were not to him directly, but to the campaign. Mkhwebane asked CR17 fund managers for details of all donations, but they only gave her info on the Bosasa R500k donation as they said other donations were not relevant to the matter. Managers told her Ramaphosa was not involved in raising donations and how they are spent - Ramaphosa had previously reiterated at the Zondo commission that he was not privy to all details on fund raising.
Justice Jafta reads out the legal framework within which the case arose. He also recounts Ramaohosa appearing before Parliament in 2018 while answering an official question from Mmusi Maimane - then DA - leader about funds received for the CR17 campaign. Maimane asked Ramaphosa if he knew anything about these funds received by his son Andile Ramaphosa from Bosasa.
The court also found she didn't have the jurisdiction to investigate the campaign funding.
Mkhwebane then approached the Constitutional Court, which is expected to rule on Thursday on whether the president did mislead Parliament and whether the Public Protector's investigation into the CR17 campaign was within her scope.