President Cyril Ramaphosa’s bid to stop Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment process over the Phala Phala matter will come under judicial scrutiny this week when the Western Cape High Court hears his urgent application on Wednesday and Thursday.
At the centre of the case is the President’s request for the court to temporarily halt the work of Parliament’s impeachment committee while he pursues a separate legal challenge against the findings of the independent Section 89 panel.
The panel, established by Parliament, concluded that there was sufficient evidence indicating Ramaphosa may have a case to answer in relation to the 2020 theft of foreign currency from his Phala Phala game farm, prompting Parliament to establish an impeachment committee.
Ramaphosa contends that the parliamentary inquiry should not proceed before the courts have ruled on his review application, which seeks to have the panel’s findings set aside.
That review is expected to be heard from 2 to 4 September.
The High Court will therefore be required to decide whether Parliament’s impeachment inquiry should be put on hold until the review process has been concluded or whether the committee may continue with its work in the interim.
Should the court grant the interim interdict, the parliamentary process will effectively be suspended until the review application has been determined.
However, if the application is unsuccessful, the committee will be able to continue its inquiry into whether the President committed impeachable offences arising from the Phala Phala saga, placing the matter back on Parliament’s agenda.
The impeachment committee has elected to oppose the President’s application.
Committee chairperson Makashule Gana, who has been cited as the second respondent, said the committee would defend its mandate before court.
“As a committee, we’re going to oppose the urgent interdict application by President Ramaphosa. As the second respondent in the application, I have to oppose this application,” Gana said.
The DA Leader Geordin Hill-Lewis also previously told Africa Daily that the legal proceedings should not prevent Parliament from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities.
“The work of the president’s court case can proceed. He’s entitled to that. We don’t begrudge him that,” he said.
“But the work of the committee can also proceed. It has lots of work to do. There’s many, many months of work ahead in that committee to get to the truth there. So it must start and it must go.”
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, who is also cited in the proceedings, has elected to abide by the court’s decision rather than oppose the application.
Didiza said Parliament’s rules do not permit the Speaker to interfere in the work of the impeachment committee, which operates independently once established.
“The Speaker has therefore filed to abide, and the court will clarify the matter,” she said.
Ramaphosa has welcomed the Speaker’s approach, saying it reflects the constitutional principle of the separation of powers between the executive, Parliament and the judiciary.
“The Speaker of Parliament has to do the work that she has to do, and she’s independent. We don’t bring any influence to bear on her. That is where the separation of powers comes into play,” Ramaphosa said.
The outcome of this week’s proceedings is expected to determine the immediate future of Parliament’s first Section 89 impeachment inquiry involving a sitting president, while the broader legal challenge to the independent panel’s findings remains before the courts.