CAPE TOWN, Western Cape – The African Transformation Movement (ATM) has strongly criticized President Cyril Ramaphosa after he filed an urgent application in the Western Cape High Court to halt the parliamentary impeachment process surrounding the Phala Phala saga.
Ramaphosa launched the urgent court process seeking to review and set aside the Section 89 Independent Panel Report, which found prima facie evidence that he may have violated the constitution and the law. In his court papers, the President argues that the parliamentary impeachment committee cannot proceed with its work while he challenges the report in court. He cited the ATM as one of the respondents in his legal bid to stay the review.
ATM Parliamentary Leader Vuyolwethu Zungula expressed deep disappointment over the President’s legal maneuver, stating that Ramaphosa is refusing to be held accountable and is actively avoiding oversight and scrutiny. Zungula pointed out that the President had previously committed to subjecting himself to Parliament’s process, which was mandated by a Constitutional Court order. According to the ATM leader, Ramaphosa’s attempt to stay the impeachment committee pending his review undermines both Parliament’s constitutional obligations and the highest court’s directive.
In his application, Ramaphosa argued that the court can only accommodate the review matter between September 2 and September 4. He expressed concern that the impeachment committee might begin hearings before the court makes a decision on his review application, which he claims would cause him considerable prejudice.
However, Zungula dismissed this argument, citing paragraph 139 of the Constitutional Court order, which clearly states that the matter must be subjected to an impeachment committee until the independent panel report is set aside by a court of law. He also referenced the established legal principle from the Viking Pony judgment, which the Constitutional Court affirmed. The judgment dictates that a decision to investigate is not reviewable because a person’s culpability has not yet been determined. Therefore, an individual’s rights are not infringed during an inquiry, as they are provided a platform to present their case, state their side, and rebut allegations.
Zungula emphasized that the impeachment committee will provide Ramaphosa with the exact opportunity he needs to clear his name and present evidence regarding the matter, ensuring the process remains legal rather than purely political.
Furthermore, the ATM confirmed it will oppose the President’s urgent interdict. Zungula stressed the importance of uncovering the truth, noting that the President wields immense power over the government and the lives of 62 million South Africans. He argued it is paramount for the public to be satisfied that their leader is not guilty of constitutional violations, undue foreign influence, or criminal influence involving undeclared dollars on his farm. Without continuing this process, Zungula warned, public trust in institutions like Parliament and the executive would be severely diminished. Conversely, if the process continues, South Africans will have the trust they need in their highest office.
Addressing the logistical concerns, Zungula noted that both the Speaker and the chairperson of the impeachment committee had already responded to Ramaphosa’s initial letters. They affirmed that the committee’s work will continue until the review is set aside by a court of law, aligning with paragraph 139 of the Constitutional Court’s ruling.
Responding to the President’s argument that he has a constitutional right not to face an impeachment inquiry unless preceded by a valid report submitted by an independent panel established in terms of rule 129D of the National Assembly rules, Zungula countered that the existing report was thoroughly compiled. He explained that the independent panel reached its conclusions based on evidence submitted by various parties, including the President’s own responses and input from Ro, the head of the protection unit. Zungula asserted that Ramaphosa’s version of events was not ignored, making it unjustified for him to now challenge the panel’s work.
Ultimately, Zungula maintained that the inquiry will protect the President’s rights, as he will be represented by his own advocate or senior counsel who can cross-examine any testifying witnesses. The ATM leader concluded that Ramaphosa should welcome the process as a definitive opportunity to address every allegation once and for all so the country can move on.