Precedents put Ramaphosa’s future in question
With the impeachment committee of the National Assembly safely in place with a chair and, soon, a set of rules, it looks from a parliamentary perspective as though it’s all systems go for the committee to do its work on the strange goings-on at Phala Phala in 2020 (“Gana vows careful pace in impeachment probe”, June 7).
However, the president has his judicial review of the Ngcobo panel report enrolled for hearing in the high court on September 2-4. At this stage no temporary interdict application is in place.
As usual, the president is playing the long game and will presumably only seek to interdict the workings of the impeachment committee if and when he has to do so.
It seems likely that the review will be heard by a panel of three judges in the high court. The pundits are taking odds on a two-to-one split on the bench, but the direction the majority takes is a matter that is too close to call.
Whoever loses in the high court is highly likely to seek and receive leave to appeal, probably to the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) but conceivably to the Constitutional Court, depending on the urgency with which the latter court approaches the matter, having kept litigants waiting for more than 500 days in the previous round of the litigation that ended in that three-part judgment of May 8.
If the matter goes to the SCA, a year of delay is probable, and if it goes on to the Concourt, a further year of delay is about the minimum the litigants can expect. The high court will most likely deliver judgment in the review by end-October, and the further two years of appeals will take the litigation to finality toward end-2028.
By then the ANC will have held its late 2027 elective conference and will most likely have a new leader. Both Thabo Mbeki, in September 2008, and Jacob Zuma, in February 2018, were swiftly deposed long before their second five-year term of office as national president had expired. Cyril Ramaphosa can expect a similar fate if he is still in office after the elective conference is held at end-2027.
Should Ramaphosa lose the early rounds of the litigation, it is a certainty that he will try his luck on appeal. Whether appeals will follow if he wins the early rounds is a different matter.
The abandonment of the impeachment proceedings after a reversal in court will free up the opponents of the president to renew their requests for a vote of no confidence in the president.
The excuse for refusing the previous no confidence motion request (the pending impeachment) will have fallen away due to the success of the president in the review proceedings.
It is by no means certain that the president will weather a no-confidence vote in which only 50% plus one needs to vote against him to see both him and his cabinet out of office.
Persisting with the impeachment case, in which a two-thirds majority vote is required, is a fool’s errand while the ANC caucus in the National Assembly remains loyal to the president and votes (all 40% of them) against any possible impeachment motion after the pain and delay of the committee hearings that must precede it.
Paul Hoffman
Accountability Now
Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma modern-day Nongqawuse
Recent developments in South Africa’s immigration debate have prompted growing concern about the direction of public discourse and the promises being made to struggling communities.
I believe Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma increasingly resembles a modern-day Nongqawuse (“Ramaphosa vows crackdown as xenophobic violence spreads”, June 3).
Just as Nongqawuse convinced many desperate people that the destruction of their cattle would lead to prosperity and liberation more than 150 years ago, so Ngobese-Zuma appears to be promoting the notion that the removal of undocumented immigrants will automatically resolve South Africa’s deep-rooted socioeconomic challenges.
South Africa faces serious problems, including unemployment, poverty, corruption, crime, failing infrastructure and poor service delivery. These challenges have accumulated over decades and cannot be solved simply by targeting migrants. Suggesting otherwise risks creating false expectations among citizens who are understandably frustrated by the country’s current circumstances.
History teaches us that societies must be cautious of narratives that promise simple solutions to complex problems. The country’s economic and social difficulties require comprehensive policy interventions, ethical leadership, economic growth, investment in education and effective governance.
While every nation has the right to enforce its immigration laws, public leaders and activists also have a responsibility to ensure their messaging does not fuel division or create unrealistic expectations. South Africans deserve honest conversations about the true causes of their challenges and realistic solutions that unite rather than divide communities.
The comparison to Nongqawuse is not intended as a personal attack but as a warning against political narratives that offer easy answers to difficult problems. South Africa’s future will be built through evidence-based policy, social cohesion and accountable governance, not through scapegoating vulnerable groups.
Hendrick Makaneta
Via email
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments to letters@businessday.co.za. Letters of more than 200 words may be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
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.