Parliament’s Impeachment Committee to oppose Ramaphosa court bid

Parliament’s Impeachment Committee to oppose Ramaphosa court bid

Cape Town – Parliament’s Section 89 Impeachment Committee is expected to oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent court application to stop it from proceeding with hearings into the controversial Phala Phala game farm scandal.

According to The Citizen, the committee reached the decision on Thursday after receiving legal advice recommending that it oppose the president’s bid for an interdict.

The 31-member committee’s chairperson, Makashule Gana, confirmed that the majority of members support opposing the application.

“That is the prevailing opinion of the committee. I don’t even need to put it to a vote; the numbers are such that those who are on the side of opposing it are in the majority,” Gana said.

He added that, as chairperson, he agrees with the committee’s position and intends to request National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza to formally oppose the application on Parliament’s behalf.

“We will then petition the Speaker to also join in opposing this application, but if the Speaker decides not to oppose the application, as the chairperson of the committee and the second respondent to the interdict application, I will represent the committee in opposing the application,” he said.

According to IOL, Advocate William Rasenga Mokhare SC advised committee members during a virtual meeting on Thursday that they have the legal authority to continue with the process and should defend their constitutional mandate in court.

Ramaphosa has approached the Western Cape High Court seeking an interdict to halt the impeachment inquiry while legal questions surrounding the process are considered. The application comes as Parliament continues with preliminary steps relating to the Phala Phala matter.

In his legal opinion, Mokhare argued that the impeachment process established under Section 89 of the Constitution is not discretionary but a constitutional obligation that Parliament must execute properly and without undue delay.

He further stated that the committee was specifically established to conduct the preliminary inquiry required by law and remains bound by a Constitutional Court order referring the Ngcobo panel report to Parliament for consideration.

Following the legal advice, most committee members agreed that the committee should oppose the president’s application and continue with its work.

ActionSA MP Athol Trollip supported the move, arguing that the Constitutional Court’s decisions cannot be reviewed by a lower court.

“The ConCourt is not appealable and a lower court cannot review the judgment,” Trollip said.

The committee’s decision highlights growing tension between Parliament’s efforts to carry out its constitutional responsibilities and the president’s attempt to obtain judicial relief from the inquiry.

However, the move was not supported by all members. Democratic Alliance Chief Whip Glynnis Breytenbach objected to the committee becoming involved in opposing the application, exposing divisions within the panel.

Mokhare maintained that opposing the interdict would not undermine the committee’s impartiality. He stressed that the committee’s position is aimed solely at protecting its constitutional function and does not amount to a finding on the president’s conduct.

“The committee is defending its right and obligation to conduct the impeachment inquiry,” he said, adding that it is not making any determination on whether Ramaphosa committed an impeachable offence.

The matter is now expected to be tested in court while Parliament’s impeachment process continues.

Mokhare also argued that the High Court lacks jurisdiction to suspend or halt the implementation of a Constitutional Court order.

Picture: Screegrab

For more African news, visit Africaninsider.com

Compiled by Glaan Sibuyi

Article written by