Yasmin Bilal
The Western Cape High Court has granted President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent application to temporarily halt Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment proceedings.
The process will remain on hold pending the outcome of his application to review the independent panel’s Phala Phala report.
Following the ruling, President Ramaphosa said he had noted the court’s decision to pause the impeachment process while the review application is being considered.
Presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the President had approached the court to halt the parliamentary process until the review application had been decided.
“President Cyril Ramaphosa notes the Western Cape High Court’s granting today of the President’s urgent application to temporarily interdict and pause Section 89 impeachment proceedings by Parliament,” Magwenya said.
Magwenya said the President had asked the court to suspend the impeachment proceedings until it had ruled on the review of the independent panel’s report into the Phala Phala game farm incident.
“The President asked the court that impeachment proceedings be paused until the court finalises a separate application by the President for a review of an independent panel’s report on an incident at the President’s Phala Phala game farm,” Magwenya said.
Magwenya said Ramaphosa respected Friday’s ruling.
“The President reaffirms his respect for judicial independence and separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution,” Magwenya said.
“The President will continue to cooperate with and abide by processes of accountability.”
Parliament has also acknowledged the Western Cape High Court’s ruling, saying it would comply with the order suspending the National Assembly’s public impeachment proceedings while the President’s application is before the courts.
It said National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza would consider the judgment and the court’s reasons in detail before deciding what impact the ruling would have on Parliament’s handling of the impeachment process.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) said it respected the Western Cape High Court’s decision to interdict the commencement of Parliament’s formal impeachment inquiry pending the outcome of President Ramaphosa’s review application.
DA leader Geordin Hill-Lewis said the judgment did not determine whether the allegations arising from the Phala Phala matter were true. Nor did it clear the President of wrongdoing.
“The judgment determines the order in which the judicial and parliamentary processes must unfold. President Ramaphosa is entitled to exercise his legal rights,” Hill-Lewis said.
He said South Africans were also entitled to answers and accountability.
“But South Africans are also entitled to answers, and to know that the same standards of accountability apply to every person who holds public office. The review application must therefore be resolved as urgently as possible,” he said.
Hill-Lewis called for expedited court dates, describing the matter as being of national importance.
He said Parliament should continue with all preparatory steps permitted by the court order. This would ensure the impeachment committee was ready to proceed once the review application had been decided.
“The DA will continue to approach this matter fairly and without prejudging the outcome. President Ramaphosa must be given a proper opportunity to answer the allegations. At the same time, the office of the President cannot place its occupant beyond scrutiny,” Hill-Lewis said.
He added that South Africans wanted institutions they could trust. These included independent courts, a Parliament that holds the executive accountable, and leaders who answer openly when serious questions arise.
RISE Mzansi also noted the High Court’s judgment granting President Ramaphosa a temporary interdict halting the public proceedings of Parliament’s Section 89 Impeachment Committee.
The party said it would study the full judgment to better understand the court’s reasoning.
“RISE Mzansi notes the judgment handed down by the Western Cape High Court, which grants President Ramaphosa a temporary interdict of the Section 89 Impeachment Committee’s public proceedings,” the party said.
The party said Parliament’s oversight responsibilities would continue despite the temporary suspension of the impeachment process.
“During this period, the work of Parliament continues, which is to hold the President and the Executive accountable through written and oral questions, committee hearings, oversight inspections, and all other mechanisms provided by the Constitution and the Rules,” RISE Mzansi said.
ActionSA said it was deeply concerned by the Western Cape High Court’s split 2-to-1 judgment granting an interim interdict that suspends the work of Parliament’s Section 89 Impeachment Committee.
The party said it had noted the dissenting judgment, which found that President Ramaphosa had failed to establish grounds for the interim relief he sought.
“We note the dissenting judgment, which found that the President had failed to establish a basis for the extraordinary interim relief he sought. In our view, Parliament should have been permitted to continue discharging its constitutional oversight responsibilities while the substantive legal issues are determined,” ActionSA said.
The party said the interim order had the immediate effect of preventing Parliament from exercising one of its most important constitutional responsibilities.
“Section 89 of the Constitution entrusts Parliament, not the Executive or the courts, with determining whether a president has committed a serious violation of the Constitution or the law, serious misconduct, or is unable to perform the functions of office. That constitutional responsibility should not be frustrated through protracted litigation,” the party said.
While affirming its respect for judicial independence and the rule of law, ActionSA warned that repeated court applications could undermine Parliament’s oversight role.
“If impeachment proceedings can routinely be suspended through successive court applications, Parliament’s constitutional powers risk becoming illusory, with justice delayed becoming accountability denied,” the party said.
ActionSA said it would study the full judgment and assess its implications. The party said it would also consider the appropriate legal and parliamentary steps to protect Parliament’s constitutional oversight role and ensure accountability is not indefinitely postponed.