By Simon Nare
The independent panel tasked with assessing whether President Cyril Ramaphosa had a case to answer over the Phala Phala farm allegations failed to distinguish between sufficient evidence and information presented to it when determining whether there was a prima facie case against the president, his lawyer has argued.
Advocate Wim Trengrove made the submission in the Western Cape High Court, which is hearing Ramaphosa’s application to have the panel’s report set aside.
Ramaphosa approached the court for a judicial review after the Constitutional Court ruled that the National Assembly acted unlawfully in 2022 when it rejected an impeachment inquiry into his handling of the theft of foreign currency from his private Phala Phala farm.
The apex court set aside the National Assembly vote and ordered the legislature to reconsider the matter in terms of Section 89 of the Constitution.
Trengrove argued that a complaint was required to
You’ve reached your free article limit
Subscribe to enjoy unlimited access to trusted journalism. Cancel anytime.
Subscribe nowNeed help? molokom@insidepolitic.co.za
