President Cyril Ramaphosa said on Monday he will not resign over the Constitutional Court judgment on Phala Phala and announced he will take the independent panel report that found there is prima facie evidence suggesting he may have a case to answer “on review on an expeditious basis”.
“I do so not out of disrespect for parliament or its processes, but to affirm the need for such findings to be correct in law and in fact, especially where parliament’s work would be based on and informed by a report I believe is flawed,” Ramaphosa said in his address to the nation on Monday evening.
“I do so out of respect for the Constitutional Court judgment and the principles of judicial review that it reiterates and reinforces. I do so in fulfilment of the rights, obligations and processes contained in our constitution.”
Ramaphosa said that while there have been calls in some circles for him to resign, nothing in the top court judgment compels him to do so.
“The Constitutional Court made no finding of any kind regarding my alleged conduct. The court made no finding on whether there was prima facie evidence of misconduct, nor if the alleged conduct, if established, justifies impeachment and the removal of the president,” he said.
“Instead, the Constitutional Court judgment reinforces the principles, rights and processes underpinning our constitutional order. This explicitly includes the right to take the report of the independent panel on review. I therefore respectfully want to make it clear that I will not resign.”
Resigning would be “to give credence to a panel report that unfortunately has grave flaws”, he said.
“To do so would be to abdicate the responsibility that I assumed when I became president of the Republic. To resign now would be to give in to those who seek to reverse the renewal of our society, the rebuilding of our institutions and the prosecution of corruption. I fully intend to continue serving the people of South Africa and to advance their interests. There is still much work to be done.”
The matter stems from the theft of foreign currency from Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm in Limpopo in 2020, and the subsequent questions raised about the source of the money, the reporting of the theft and the steps allegedly taken to recover the funds.
Ramaphosa has consistently denied wrongdoing and has said the money is linked to the sale of buffalo.
The controversy triggered a section 89 process in parliament, the constitutional mechanism through which the National Assembly may remove a president from office for a serious violation of the constitution or the law, serious misconduct, or inability to perform the functions of office.
In 2022, an independent panel chaired by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo found that there was prima facie evidence suggesting Ramaphosa may have a case to answer. The panel’s report did not make a final finding of guilt, but found that the matter warranted further parliamentary consideration.
However, in December 2022, the National Assembly voted not to adopt the panel’s report. That decision effectively stopped the impeachment process from advancing to the next stage, which would have been the establishment of an impeachment committee to investigate the matter further.
The EFF, joined by the ATM, challenged the National Assembly’s decision in the Constitutional Court. The parties argued that parliament had acted unlawfully by refusing to refer the report to an impeachment committee and by relying on rules that allowed the National Assembly to halt the process before the allegations had been properly investigated.
On Friday, the Constitutional Court set aside the National Assembly’s December 13 2022 decision not to refer the independent panel report to an impeachment committee. The court also found rule 129I of the National Assembly rules unconstitutional and invalid, and directed an interim reading-in of the rule pending formal amendments by parliament.
The court held that the National Assembly is constitutionally obliged to determine whether a president has committed conduct falling within section 89(1) of the constitution, and that such a determination must be rational, evidence-based and attributable to the National Assembly as the ultimate decision-maker.
Following the judgment, parliament said National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has determined the process to be followed. According to parliament, Didiza will formally inform the National Assembly of the independent panel report by tabling it through the appropriate parliamentary journals and will provide Ramaphosa with a copy of the report, as directed by the court.
Didiza will also initiate the process to constitute an impeachment committee in terms of rules 129J to 129O, formally refer the independent panel report to that committee, and refer the Constitutional Court judgment to the National Assembly subcommittee on the review of rules for the necessary amendments.
Parliament said she will still determine the programme, procedural arrangements, timeframes and institutional support needed for the committee to conduct and finalise its work.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.