Johannesburg - In September, it was revealed that Hazim Mustafa, a Sudanese national and businessman living in Saudi Arabia, paid more than $580 000 (about R10 million) to President Cyril Ramaphosa for game animals.
Mustafa is thought to be a Sudanese football club owner and businessman who was visiting Limpopo province at the time of his purchase from Ramaphosa's farm in December 2019.
He told Sky News that he was not aware that the animals belonged to Ramaphosa, as he was there on holiday to celebrate his wife’s birthday.
Sky News, an international news outlet, revealed on Monday that it had tracked down the man accused of paying more than $580 000 to purchase game from Ramaphosa in 2019.
Sky News said the Sudanese national allegedly declared his dollars to officials at OR Tambo International Airport upon landing in the country.
It is reported that the president’s client is awaiting his refund after the purchased game was not delivered as promised.
Mustafa said he dealt with a broker to arrange the purchase of the animals, but the Covid pandemic meant they were never delivered.
News of the non-delivery and purchase comes just as the president is challenging the Section 89 independent panel report, which found that Ramaphosa may have a case to answer on the Phala Phala farm robbery, which was concealed in order to keep the scandal under wraps.
Mustafa is said to have been in Limpopo celebrating Christmas and his wife's birthday without any knowledge of who the farm belonged to.
"I wasn't aware it belonged to the president. I dealt with a broker – the one working on Phala Phala Farm," said the Dubai-based businessman and Sudanese football club owner.
The independent panel's evidence stated that it examined an acknowledgement of receipt of $580 000 written out to "Mr Hazim" by a Phala Phala employee identified as Mr Ndlovu.
"When we did the deal, they were supposed to prepare the animals for export. Then the Covid-19 lockdown happened, and there was delay after delay after delay," said Mr Mustafa, who's also known for his business ties to deposed Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir's regime.
"It took too long, so I did not get my money back, but there is an understanding that I will be refunded," the businessman told Sky News.
When asked how he entered the country with so much money, the businessman said through the airport.
"I declared it in Johannesburg, OR Tambo airport,'' he said.
However, he failed to furnish proof of having done so.
Social media users have accused Sky News of an attempt to spin the Phala Phala farm investigation to favour president Ramaphosa’s assertion that he sold game to a Sudanese business man Hazim Mustafa who reportedly paid $580 000 to Ramaphosa’s employee identified as Mr Ndlovu in December 2019.
This comes after the American-based news outlet revealed in an online story that it had tracked down the Saudi Arabia-based businessman who confirmed that he was in South Africa in December 2019 and had no idea that the farm in which he made the purchase from belonged to the country’s president.
“His country has loads of buffaloes/ankoles and they are cheap. Next to his country, there is Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania who also sell these animals (cheaper). But he went all the way to Southern Africa … interesting,” tweeted Sphithiphiti Evaluator on Tuesday after the news outlet claimed to have spoken to the businessman.
Social media users also questioned why the businessman would emerge almost three years after the purchase to claim a refund just when Ramaphosa was facing a possible impeachment following the section 89 independent panel report which found out that Ramaphosa may have violated his oath of office.
Meanwhile, the Limpopo Economic Development and Tourism Department has told the SABC that no application was received from Phala Phala Wildlife or Ntabanyoni CC to prepare the export of 20 buffalo to Sudan in 2019 or at any time thereafter.
The department said it could not comment on why there was a delay in exporting these animals.
"The reason being that there is no legislative requirement that stipulates the time frame within which the animals must be removed from the property where they have been sold.
“Furthermore, the department acts only upon receipt of an application for a permit for any activity in relation to biodiversity," it said.
The Star