Ramaphosa impeachment inquiry revived as Constitutional Court rules National Assembly actions were invalid

South Africa’s National Assembly breached the country’s Constitution with an invalid vote on 13 December 2022 in relation to ‘the Phala Phala farm scandal’, and must now refer an independent report into the conduct of President Ramaphosa onto the Impeachment Committee, held the Constitutional Court of South Africa today in a much-anticipated decision hailed by some as ‘a victory for the South African people’. 

“This is a grave moment for Parliament, for the Presidency, and for South Africa’s constitutional democracy,” says Geordin Hill-Lewis, the new leader of the Democratic Alliance, which is in coalition government with President Ramaphosa’s African National Congress. “Those who hold the highest offices in the land must be held to the highest standards of honesty, transparency and accountability. The impeachment committee must now do its work properly, rationally, fairly and constitutionally. The President must have the opportunity to account fully.”

Today’s Constitutional Court decision results from a hearing in November 2024, following an application brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM) in relation to the Phala Phala scandal, which involves the theft of a large sum of foreign currency from the President’s private Phala Phala Wildlife Game Farm, and the circumstances surrounding that incident. 

As noted by the Court, in June 2022 the ATM submitted a motion to the Speaker of the National Assembly, in terms of section 89 of the Constitution and rules 129A-129Q of the Rules of the National Assembly, requesting the National Assembly initiate an inquiry into the removal of President Ramaphosa from office for his conduct in the Phala Phala controversy. The Speaker appointed an independent panel, which produced a report on 30 November 2022 finding a prima facie case that the President may have committed a serious violation of the Constitution and the law, and serious misconduct. However, on 13 December 2022, the National Assembly - then controlled by the President’s African National Congress party - voted against referring the report onto the Impeachment Committee for further examination. 

That National Assembly vote effectively halted impeachment proceedings against Ramaphosa. EFF and AMT challenged that decision on constitutional grounds, including that rule 129I was unconstitutional as it allowed the National Assembly to effectively block the establishment of an Impeachment Committee even when an independent panel had found a prima facie case against the President. 

Today, the Constitutional Court ruled in favour of the applicants, reviving impeachment proceedings against President Ramaphosa as a majority of the Court ruled that rule 129I was “inconsistent with the Constitution and invalid”, that the National Assembly vote was unconstitutional and invalid, and that the report from the independent panel must now be referred to the Impeachment Committee. 

While Julius Malema, founder and leader of EFF, has called on President Ramaphosa to resign after this morning’s Constitutional Court ruling, others across several parties have noted that now due constitutional processes should unfold. 

“This judgment is a victory for constitutional accountability and the rule of law in South Africa,” says Roger Solomons, spokesperson for Build One South Africa (BOSA). “It reaffirms a foundational democratic principle that no one is above the law – not the President, and not Parliament itself… When Parliament fails to act independently and courageously, it weakens public trust in democratic institutions and undermines the principle that all public representatives are subject to the law.”

Brett Herron, Secretary-General of the GOOD Party, noted that several organisations, including the Public Protector, the South African Reserve Bank, and National Prosecuting Authority, have investigated aspects of the Phala Phala case and cleared President Ramaphosa of wrongdoing, but that “Parliament’s mismanagement of the matter has compounded the secrecy and controversy”. 

If the President has a complete set of answers to the questions about what transpired on his farm, and after the alleged break in, added Herron, he has nothing to lose from a parliamentary impeachment process, other than short-term embarrassment, and everything to gain from public transparency. 

In a media statement this afternoon, President Ramaphosa said he respects the judgement of the Constitutional Court and reaffirms his commitment to the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary, and the rule of law. He maintains that no person is above the law and that any allegations should be subjected to due process without fear, favour, or prejudice. The President called on all South Africans to respect the Constitutional Court judgement and all judicial decisions.