South Africa Parliament Restarts Ramaphosa Impeachment Process After Court Ruling

South Africa's National Assembly will restart impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa following a Constitutional Court ruling. The court found parliament acted unconstitutionally when it rejected an independent panel report on the Phala Phala farm matter. The matter involves the alleged theft of about $580,000 from Ramaphosa's private game farm, sparking controversy over fund declarations. Ramaphosa insists he committed no wrongdoing and will not resign, reaffirming his commitment to the Constitution and rule of law.

Key Points: Ramaphosa Impeachment Process Restarted After Court Ruling

  • Constitutional Court ruled parliament acted unconstitutionally in rejecting panel report
  • Parliament will restart Section 89 impeachment process related to Phala Phala farm theft
  • President Ramaphosa insists he did not engage in wrongdoing
  • Ramaphosa says he will not resign, will continue serving South Africa
3 min read

South African parliament to restart Ramaphosa impeachment process after court ruling: Local media

South Africa's parliament will restart impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa after a Constitutional Court ruling found it acted unconstitutionally.

"I have consistently maintained that I have not stolen public money, committed any crime, nor violated my oath of office. - Cyril Ramaphosa"

Johannesburg, May 12

South Africa's National Assembly will reopen impeachment-related proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa following a Constitutional Court ruling, local media reported.

The Constitutional Court on earlier ruled that the country's parliament acted unconstitutionally when it rejected an independent panel report on the Phala Phala matter involving Ramaphosa, reopening the possibility of impeachment proceedings against the head of state, Xinhua news agency reported.

Citing a statement from National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, the South African Government News Agency reported that the parliament will comply with the court's decision and restart the Section 89 process related to the independent panel report into the Phala Phala farm matter.

The matter relates to the alleged theft of about $580,000 from Ramaphosa's private game farm in Limpopo Province in 2020, which later sparked public controversy over whether the funds were properly declared and reported to authorities.

Didiza said that she would determine the program, timelines and institutional support necessary to ensure the impeachment committee completes its work effectively, fairly and within the framework of the Constitution and National Assembly rules.

Details regarding the committee's composition and operational arrangements are expected to be announced through official channels in due course.

The independent panel, chaired by former Constitutional Court judge Sandile Ngcobo, found prima facie evidence suggesting possible constitutional and legal violations by the president in relation to the Phala Phala matter.

In response, Ramaphosa said Monday that he accepted and respected the Constitutional Court's ruling, reaffirming his firm commitment to the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.

In his address to the nation on Monday night, Ramaphosa insisted that he did not engage in wrongdoing. "Since a criminal complaint was laid against me in June 2022, I have consistently maintained that I have not stolen public money, committed any crime, nor violated my oath of office," he said.

Ramaphosa said that from the beginning, he had committed to cooperating with all competent institutions, and such cooperation has continued through "all investigations and enquiries into the matter," and will be sustained going forward.

Turning to the findings of the independent panel submitted in December 2022, Ramaphosa reiterated his disagreement with its conclusions and reasoning. He said that they were based on hearsay and that "no evidence, let alone sufficient evidence," had been produced to support claims of constitutional or legal violations or serious misconduct.

In his address, Ramaphosa reiterated that he will not resign, saying "I fully intend to continue serving the people of South Africa and to advance their interests."

- IANS

Share this article:

Reader Comments

P
Priya S
I'm struck by how the South African judiciary is holding parliament accountable. The Constitutional Court ruling is a big deal - it's saying parliament can't just ignore a panel report with prima facie evidence. That's something we can learn from. In India too, parliamentary committees should have more teeth 🔍
J
James A
As someone who follows global politics, this Ramaphosa case fascinates me. The claim that the panel relied on hearsay is a serious one. But also $580,000 is a lot of money to have at a game farm. In any democracy, leaders need to be transparent. India's politicians could take note - especially with all the talk about electoral bonds and undisclosed income.
V
Vikram M
This is a classic case of 'chakravyuh' - a complex situation where the president is caught between the judiciary, parliament, and the constitution. Ramaphosa says no wrongdoing, but the panel found prima facie evidence. In India's political landscape too, we see such standoffs. However, I appreciate that he's accepting the court's ruling - that's democratic maturity 👍
S
Sarah B
I find it ironic that Ramaphosa - the anti-corruption crusader who succeeded Zuma - now faces an impeachment process. The Phala Phala matter seems like a distraction campaign honestly. But what's important is process: parliament should respect the court, the committee should be fair. In terms of governance, both India and South Africa need stronger institutional integrity.
R
Rohit P
This reminds me of how our own parliament sometimes brushes aside CAG and other reports. Ramaphosa says he disagrees with the panel's 'hearsay

We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.

Leave a Comment

Minimum 50 characters 0/50