By Johnathan Paoli
The Western Cape High Court has dismissed applications by the EFF and the African Legal Professionals Association (ALPA) challenging Parliament’s decision to withdraw advocate Thandazani Griffiths Madonsela’s appointment as chief evidence leader of the Section 89 impeachment inquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Handing down judgment on Friday, Judge Chantel Fortuin said the full bench had been divided, with the majority finding against the applicants.
“The dissenting judgment concludes that it would have reviewed and set aside the committee’s decision to rescind the recommendation with costs,” Fortuin said.
But she confirmed that the majority judgment had dismissed both applications, effectively allowing Parliament’s Impeachment Committee to proceed with its decision to withdraw Madonsela’s nomination.
ALSO READ: NUMSA leadership troubles go from bad to worse
Fortuin said two judgments had been prepared after the court considered the arguments advanced by the parties.
“The second judgment, which dissents from the majority, concludes that both applications be granted for the reasons set out in that judgment,” she said.
The judge indicated that the full judgments, containing the reasons for the respective decisions, would be circulated to the parties.
The court also accepted the EFF’s late submission of legal arguments and waived certain procedural requirements relating to service and filing deadlines.
No order was made regarding legal costs.
The applications were brought after the committee rescinded its recommendation to appoint Madonsela as evidence leader in the inquiry into Ramaphosa’s alleged misconduct following the theft of US$580,000 from his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo.
The EFF and ALPA had argued that the committee’s decision to reverse its earlier recommendation was unlawful and constituted an act of bad faith.
The dispute arose after Ramaphosa wrote to the committee on August 18, 2026, objecting to Madonsela’s appointment and raising concerns about a potential conflict of interest.
The president questioned Madonsela’s previous involvement in the matter, particularly his disclosure that he had provided legal advice to a parliamentary study group on the impeachment issue.
ALSO READ: Malaria claims 17 lives in Gauteng as cases soar
The ANC had also raised concerns, arguing that Madonsela had previously provided legal advice to the party on the matter and that his appointment could therefore compromise the independence of the inquiry.
Madonsela had disclosed his previous involvement, but the committee maintained that it had not initially understood that the legal advice he referred to related to the ANC.
It subsequently concluded that the circumstances could create a perception of a conflict of interest and decided to rescind its recommendation.
The committee also referred to concerns surrounding Madonsela’s previous removal from the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) in 2022.
Following the decision, the committee reopened the nomination process, but the appointment of a replacement evidence leader was put on hold pending the outcome of the court challenge.
During the proceedings in October, the EFF argued that the committee had effectively allowed Ramaphosa and the ANC to influence its decision-making, undermining its independence and constitutional responsibilities.
The committee, however, defended its decision, maintaining that it was entitled to reconsider its recommendation when concerns about the suitability of its preferred candidate emerged.
ALSO READ: Illegal cigarettes in SARS’s sights as new tracking system looms
The court challenge had also left the parliamentary process in limbo, with the committee not having met for more than two months since the applications were launched.
Welcoming Friday’s outcome, committee chairperson and Rise Mzansi MP Makashule Gana said the committee would now resume its work and move towards appointing a replacement.
“We need to move ahead and appoint a new evidence leader,” Gana said in a video shared on social media.
The Section 89 inquiry was established to consider whether Ramaphosa had violated his oath of office or engaged in conduct inconsistent with his position following the February 2020 burglary at his Limpopo farm.
The matter became public in June 2022 after former State Security Agency director-general Arthur Fraser laid a criminal complaint against the president, alleging that he had concealed the theft and subsequent investigation.
Ramaphosa has maintained that the money stolen from the farm was payment from a Sudanese businessman for 20 buffaloes.
The Section 89 process is separate from the criminal investigations and court proceedings relating to the burglary.
Meanwhile, earlier on Friday morning, the Modimolle Regional Court postponed the sentencing proceedings of the two accused convicted in connection with the Phala Phala theft to 26 November.
Imanuwela David, who was convicted of theft, housebreaking, conspiracy and money laundering, and former farm worker Froliana Joseph, convicted of conspiracy to commit housebreaking, appeared briefly in court and remain in custody.
