South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has launched a legal challenge aimed at halting Parliament’s renewed impeachment inquiry linked to the long-running Phala Phala controversy.
In papers filed before the Western Cape High Court on Tuesday, Ramaphosa argued that it would be unreasonable and unjust for lawmakers to continue with a Section 89 impeachment process while he is seeking a judicial review of the report underpinning the inquiry.
The president also warned that if the National Assembly proceeds with the investigation, he will seek an urgent court interdict to suspend the process.
The legal action comes just one day after Parliament confirmed it had received the names of 31 representatives from 16 political parties who are expected to participate in the impeachment inquiry.
The dispute marks the latest chapter in the political and legal fallout surrounding the Phala Phala farm scandal, which first emerged in 2022 and has remained one of the most controversial issues facing Ramaphosa’s presidency.
Constitutional Court ruling reignited the matter
Earlier this month, South Africa’s Constitutional Court ruled that Parliament acted irrationally when it dismissed an earlier Section 89 panel report in 2022.
That judgment reopened debate around whether Parliament should reconsider impeachment proceedings against Ramaphosa.
The Phala Phala controversy centres on allegations related to a large cash theft at the president’s private game farm in Limpopo province and questions surrounding how the matter was handled.
Opposition parties have repeatedly accused Ramaphosa of possible misconduct, including allegations of concealment and potential breaches of financial regulations.
Ramaphosa has consistently denied wrongdoing.
In his latest court filing, the president argued that the independent panel led by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo misunderstood its legal mandate and misinterpreted the evidence placed before it.
According to Ramaphosa, the panel also exceeded the scope of the four charges it was originally tasked with assessing.
The president further claimed that several issues raised in the report were never put to him for response, making the process procedurally unfair.
Concerns raised over evidence used in report
Ramaphosa’s affidavit also challenges the nature of the evidence relied upon by the panel.
He argued that the report improperly used hearsay evidence, a confidential Namibian police document, and an audio recording whose authenticity has not been verified.
The president questioned how those materials were obtained and said the panel treated them as factual evidence despite uncertainties surrounding their origin and reliability.
For that reason, Ramaphosa contends that the conclusions reached by the panel were irrational and legally flawed.
The Section 89 process is one of the most serious constitutional mechanisms available to Parliament and can potentially lead to the removal of a sitting president from office if sufficient grounds are established.
Political analysts say the renewed legal battle could deepen tensions between Parliament and the presidency while also placing renewed pressure on the governing African National Congress (ANC).
The matter is expected to attract significant national attention as both legal and political processes unfold simultaneously.
If the High Court agrees to hear Ramaphosa’s review application urgently, it could temporarily delay Parliament’s plans to proceed with the impeachment inquiry.
Source: Adapted from South African court filings and parliamentary developments related to the Phala Phala matter.