By Mapaballo Borotho
- The Constitutional Court has ruled that the National Assembly process used to dismiss the Phala Phala impeachment report against President Cyril Ramaphosa was unconstitutional.
- The ruling means Parliament must revisit the matter and could establish an impeachment committee to investigate the president’s conduct.
- Ramaphosa has reaffirmed his commitment to the Constitution and says he has cooperated with all investigations.
President Cyril Ramaphosa is set to face an impeachment process in Parliament following the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the Phala Phala scandal.
On Friday, 8 May, the Constitutional Court found that Rule 129I of the National Assembly Rules, which governs the consideration and referral of reports related to the removal or impeachment of a president, was unconstitutional and invalid.
The apex court also set aside the National Assembly’s vote on 13 December 2022, which declined to refer the Section 89 independent panel report on Ramaphosa’s conduct in the Phala Phala matter to an impeachment committee.
The independent panel had found that Ramaphosa may have a case to answer regarding alleged serious violations of the Constitution, including exposing himself to a conflict of interest, performing paid work outside of office, and potentially contravening anti-corruption laws.
Ramaphosa reportedly came close to resigning following the publication of the report before senior ANC leaders persuaded him otherwise.
What happens next?
Following the Constitutional Court ruling, Parliament may now establish an impeachment committee to investigate the president’s conduct further.
If such a committee is formed, public hearings will be held. However, this does not automatically mean Ramaphosa will be impeached.
The impeachment committee would first need to make findings, and at least two-thirds of the National Assembly would then have to support the president’s removal in terms of Section 89 of the Constitution.
Ramaphosa responds
In a statement released by the Presidency, Ramaphosa reaffirmed his commitment to the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary, and the rule of law.
“President Ramaphosa has been consistent in providing his full assistance to the various enquiries into this matter.
“President Ramaphosa maintains that no person is above the law and that any allegations should be subjected to due process without fear, favour or prejudice,” said Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya.
Political parties react
Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema has called on President Cyril Ramaphosa to resign following the Constitutional Court ruling.
Malema and the African Transformation Movement (ATM) were the two parties that brought the matter before the apex court.
Speaking to reporters outside the court in Johannesburg, Malema said Ramaphosa should step down and
“Concentrate on this impeachment process because it has serious implications for him as an individual”.
The African National Congress (ANC) also released a statement, saying the judgment demonstrates “the importance of allowing institutions to function independently” within South Africa’s constitutional democracy.
Where does the drama stem from?
The Phala Phala saga began in 2020 after approximately $580,000 was allegedly stolen from Phala Phala, Ramaphosa’s farm in Limpopo.
In 2022, an independent panel found evidence suggesting that the president may have violated his oath of office.
However, during a parliamentary debate on the panel’s findings, Members of Parliament voted 214 to 148 against establishing an impeachment committee.
South Africa has strict regulations regarding foreign currency, which require cash to be deposited with an authorised dealer, such as a bank, within 30 days. At the time, Ramaphosa said the money was proceeds from the sale of buffaloes.
Three people are currently on trial for the alleged theft.
READ NEXT: Former Botswana President Festus Mogae dies aged 86
