Politics

CR17 BANK STATEMENT CASE HAS BEEN DISMISSED

Ramaphosa politics

The case against President Cyril Ramaphosa was dismissed on Tuesday and the Pretoria Magistrate court ruled that the CR17 bank records will remain sealed.

The case was opened by the Economic Freedom Fighter(EFF), as they wanted the funders of Ramaphosa’s campaign to be made public. The basis for the statements remaining sealed is that they contain information about donors, which is confidential. The EFF later went forth and challenged the above decision.

The High court finds no argument of interest of justice to unseal the CR17 bank statement. The EFF’s application was dismissed with cost in the matter that involved 14 respondents, which meant the bank statement will not be published. The EFF maintain that it is in the public interest that the CR17 bank statements are unsealed. Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng rejected the constitutional court ruling, says Ramaphosa did benefit from the donations.

CR17 documents were shield in an office meeting, with no involvement or knowledge about from the public. The document which reportedly contained information about the donors who funded President Cyril Ramaphosa’s campaign in 2017 is to remain sealed.  The EFF is expected to appeal the ruling. The EFF attempted to unseal the documents after the application was made in relation to the public Protector’s report, which was said to be invalidated. During the course of the court proceedings, Deputy Judge President Aubrey Ledwaba positively looked at a request from the president’s lawyers for the bank statements to be sealed.

The EFF issued a statement saying they will directly approach the constitutional court on the matter of unsealing the CR17 document in the interest of ensuring that the state is not captured by people who made an investment in an individual, in order to secure their economic and political interest. A report by News24 stated that SC for the EFF, Ishmael Semenya, stated that the party was not trying to say that the donations to the campaign contained anything untoward but he did argue that the information was meant for the public but was kept confidential.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

error: Content is protected !!