Zuko Komisa

- The Constitutional Court is considering the MK Party’s challenge to President Ramaphosa’s actions against Police Minister Senzo Mchunu.
- The MK Party argues that placing Mchunu on special leave and appointing a non-cabinet member as acting minister were unconstitutional.
- Ramaphosa’s legal team contends that the President’s powers allow for such interim measures during an investigation.
The Constitutional Court of South Africa has reserved judgment in the urgent application brought by the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party and former President Jacob Zuma against President Cyril Ramaphosa.
The case challenges three key decisions made by Ramaphosa: placing Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on special leave, appointing Professor Firoz Cachalia as acting police minister, and establishing a judicial commission of inquiry. These actions followed serious allegations of corruption and collusion with organised crime syndicates made against Mchunu by KwaZulu-Natal’s police commissioner.
During the hearing, the MK Party’s legal team argued that the President does not have the constitutional authority to place a minister on “leave of absence,” contending that this is an unlawful measure akin to a suspension. They further challenged the appointment of Cachalia, who is not a cabinet member, as unconstitutional.
Ramaphosa’s legal counsel, however, argued that the President’s powers to appoint and dismiss ministers implicitly include the discretion to take interim measures such as special leave to allow for an impartial investigation. They also contended that the matter should have been brought before a High Court rather than directly to the Constitutional Court.
The court has now reserved its decision, leaving the legality of the President’s actions in question.
Point of View with Phemelo Motene spoke to Legal expert Mpumelelo Zikalala who broke down the arguments.
Listen to the conversation here:
READ NEXT: 8 months later and still no sign of kidnapped Pretoria businessman, Jerry Boshoga



