Last week I read the statement Arthur Fraser made to the police as part of a complaint against Cyril Ramaphosa.

Of course, Mr. Fraser has a lot of gripes with the president and undoubtedly this is part of a bigger campaign by the anti-Ramaphosa forces in the year of the ANC’s elective conference. This would explain why Mr. Fraser took two years to do anything with the information.

It is clear that those who do not wish a second term for Ramaphosa know that they are not going to win purely on popularity, so, their hope is to get something on Ramphosa, which would lead to a corruption charge. This in turn would require the president to step aside - according to the ANC’s anti-corruption rules that he fought so hard for - and make it impossible for him to stand for re-election.

To anyone who follows politics, that should be blatantly obvious.

However, the whole story has left me with a deep sense of unease. 

There are a lot of unanswered questions. Why were transactions done in cash? Why not bank the cash? What happened after it was stolen? Most importantly how much of all of this did the President know at the time?

I have been told by a number of people who are involved in wildlife trade that it is very common for transactions to be done in cash. Of course, when I ask why, the answers become a lot more vague and problematic.

In my job as an analyst, I always try to look at all possible scenarios. The negative one - where Fraser’s allegations that Ramaphosa was involved or knew and approved of it all turns out to be true - would be a huge problem for Ramaphosa and his future as President.

However, I am hoping that there is a possible alternative explanation that goes something like this: Given that Cyril Ramaphosa was President at the time of the robbery and clearly not hands-on in the business, someone in his employ was handling the sales. The President was not informed of the sale, or if he was, not about the details - such as the cash payment and where the cash was.

Then the cash gets stolen. (One must wonder how on earth the President’s property was not properly secured?)

The President gets informed about this and he tells the head of the VIP protection unit to handle the matter. (This would not be unusual.) He then leaves it with them and when he asks at some future date what happened he is told, it was handled. He leaves it at that and returns to the millions of problems the country is facing.

Of course, this would only make sense if it wasn’t actually $4 million. (The Presidency has said that it was significantly less).  Even someone with Ramaphosa’s wealth would not be happy to lose R60 million!

I’m hoping that this best case scenario - or at least part of it - is what transpired in reality. For one thing, I certainly do not believe that President Ramaphosa would have been part of any kidnapping or torturing. That is just not the man he is.

It is of course possible that some of his employers were involved in such actions and the question then is whether he found out about it and what actions he took.

Then there is still the issue of SARS. Would the cash have been declared to SARS if it hadn’t been stolen and were other transactions in the past duly declared?

Many years ago, when I was Ambassador to Ireland, I had lunch with Ramaphosa when he was still in business (but on the NEC of the ANC). We had a lovely chat and spoke amongst others about corruption and his passion to eradicate that. At some point he remarked how he always instructed his accountants to not even make legal deductions, but just pay everything.

“Tax is how they get you,” he said. “And I never want to be caught for anything illegal.”

I have always remembered this.

So, I will really be devastated if it turns out that the President has knowingly done something illegal. In a world of so much corruption and dodgy politicians, he has been one of the very few shining lights.

I understand his resistance to speak about the matter until a full investigation has been completed.  I also believe that his willingness to appear before the Integrity Commission is a good sign, but of course that does not help us ordinary citizens of this country to understand what is going on.

So, until the investigation is completed I, like the rest of the country, will just have to hope and pray that this is not (in the words of Julius Caesar) a case of “Et tu, Ramaphosa”.