South Africa's Constitutional Court ruled Friday that Parliament's previous rejection of a report into President Cyril Ramaphosa's conduct was unconstitutional [1].
The decision effectively reopens the impeachment process against the president, forcing the legislature to reconsider whether he violated the law or the constitution. This ruling removes a significant legal shield that had protected Ramaphosa from further parliamentary scrutiny since 2022 [2].
The case centers on the Phala Phala scandal, which first emerged in 2020 when foreign currency was stolen from a sofa at the president's farm [3]. A Section 89 panel was tasked with investigating the matter, but the South African Parliament later rejected the panel's findings [2].
During that previous parliamentary vote, 148 members voted in favor of adopting the Section 89 panel report [4]. However, 214 members voted against adopting the report [4]. This majority vote had previously halted the impeachment proceedings, but the court has now determined that the process used to reject the findings was flawed [1].
The court ordered a new parliamentary review to assess the grounds for impeachment. The ruling emphasizes that the legislature failed to properly fulfill its constitutional obligations when it dismissed the report [2].
Ramaphosa has faced prolonged criticism over the transparency of the funds involved in the farm scandal. The Constitutional Court's decision ensures that the legal process must return to the halls of Parliament in Cape Town for a fresh assessment [1].
“The Constitutional Court ruled that Parliament’s earlier rejection of the Phala Phala report was unconstitutional.”
This ruling represents a significant check on executive power by the judiciary, signaling that parliamentary majorities cannot simply vote away accountability for the head of state. By reviving the impeachment process, the court has placed Ramaphosa's political survival back in the hands of a legislature that must now navigate the legal requirements of the Section 89 process, potentially destabilizing the current administration's grip on power.
