The South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa has been allegedly reported to have sealed bank statements for CR17 Presidential campaign.

The news which was made public was shared through Avovo through his twitter handle revealed that an unofficial information that Ramaphosa sealed bank statements for CR17 Presidential campaign will be leaked online. The people who are responsible have decided to remain anonymous but feel it is their duty to inform the public.

 

Meanwile, in August 2019, The Presidency denounced the leaking of confidential banking information belonging to backers of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s CR17 campaign to the media and reiterated that he had run a “clean campaign” ahead of the ANC’s Nasrec elective conference in 2017.

Read Also:  Kapamilya actor Coco Martin reacts to shut down of ABS-CBN

According to IOL.CO.ZA, The bank statements form part of legal papers before the court in Ramaphosa’s challenge to Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane’s report over the millions of rand donated to his campaign.

The president was arguing that the report by Mkhwebane was irrational and has to be set side.

Ramaphosa’s lawyer Peter Harris wrote to Deputy Judge President Aubrey Ledwaba that the record of the donors be sealed and not made public. He also argues that the information may have been obtained illegally.

But Mkhwebane’s spokesperson Oupa Segalwe said on Friday that everything was above aboard.

Mkhwebane found Ramaphosa lied to Parliament regarding the R500 000 donation from controversial Bosasa chief executive Gavin Watson for his presidential campaign. She cited leaked emails, which have since been widely circulated on social media, as the source of her information.

Read Also:  Brazilian composer & writer, Aldir Blanc is dead

The leaked emails purport to show that the president consulted with his campaign managers about which backers to approach for funding and how much was donated to his campaign, despite his claims to the contrary.

The Presidency expressed “grave concern” at what it said “amounts to a violation of the constitutionally enshrined right to privacy. This is all the more troubling as it seems clear that this information had been, from the first instance, obtained in an illegal manner.