Simon Nare
Parliament’s Impeachment Committee on the Section 89 Enquiry will oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent court application to interdict its inquiry into his handling of the theft of foreign currency from his private Phala Phala farm.
The committee, which met virtually on Thursday, adopted the majority view that it should oppose Ramaphosa’s application after the president cited the committee through its chairperson, Rise Mzansi MP Makashule Gana.
Ramaphosa wants the Western Cape High Court to halt the impeachment process pending the outcome of his judicial review of the independent panel report, which found he may have a case to answer over the Phala Phala matter.
Following advice from Parliament’s Constitutional and Legal Services Office, Advocate William Mokhari, MPs deliberated on the options available to them, including filing an explanatory affidavit. But the majority said Gana must oppose Ramaphosa’s application so that the work of the committee can proceed.
“The prevailing opinion based on the opinions that have been made by the parties is that the committee needs to oppose the urgent application of an interdict by the president.
“So, 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, they are in the majority,” said Gana.
He said since he had been cited personally as the chairperson of the committee, he aligned himself with the view of the majority of committee members and would oppose the application as chairperson.
Gana said the committee would also petition National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, who has also been cited in Ramaphosa’s court papers, to join in opposing the urgent application.
“If the speaker decides not to oppose the urgent application, as the chairperson of the committee and the second respondent to the urgent application, I will represent the committee in opposing the application,” he said.
Gana said after receiving the legal opinion from Mokhari it was no longer necessary to seek a second legal opinion, as the committee was on a “good footing” to oppose the application.
Ramaphosa filed the urgent court application to stop the committee from proceeding with an inquiry into whether he breached the Constitution in his handling of the theft at his farm, arguing that the process would undermine ongoing judicial review proceedings.
“Even if only part of the impeachment enquiry is undertaken before the review process is determined, substantial harm will already have been done,” Ramaphosa said in the affidavit.
He contends the matter is urgent because allowing the proceedings to continue would render any later review largely ineffective.
“In those circumstances, the review court will be confronted with a situation in which consequences flowing from the report have already occurred before the validity of the report has been determined. The effectiveness of the review proceedings will have been materially undermined,” he said.
Ramaphosa has launched a judicial review of the Independent Panel’s findings, arguing that it applied the wrong legal standard and failed to present sufficient evidence to justify impeachment proceedings.
The Constitutional Court earlier set aside the National Assembly’s 2022 decision not to proceed with the Section 89 process and referred the independent panel report to an Impeachment Committee for further consideration.
Mokhari told committee members that the impeachment proceedings would not disadvantage Ramaphosa, since he would be given an opportunity to account to the committee and give his side of the story.
He added that the Western Cape High Court was legally in no position to set aside a Constitutional Court order.
INSIDE POLITICS
