Western Cape High Court Pauses Impeachment of President Ramaphosa

What the Court Decided

On Friday, the Western Cape High Court told the National Assembly to stop any public impeachment hearings against President Cyril Ramaphosa. Judge André le Grange issued a stay, which means the process is put on hold until a higher court reviews the case.

Who Was Involved in the Ruling

The Bench

The case was heard by a full panel:

• Justice Diane Davis
• Justice Matthew Francis
• Acting Deputy Judge President André le Grange (who wrote the decision)

Two Different Views Inside the Court

Minority Opinion

Two judges said Ramaphosa had not asked for an injunction (a court order to stop something) and therefore saw no need to halt the hearings.

Majority Opinion

Judge le Grange and the other two judges disagreed. They agreed with Ramaphosa’s request and granted a temporary interdict, which blocks the impeachment committee from holding public hearings while the review application is pending.

Why the Court Stopped the Hearings

Risk of Irreparable Harm

The judges heard that if the impeachment hearings went ahead, Ramaphosa would suffer “irreparable damage.” They explained:

• Once the hearings start, the public spectacle cannot be undone.
• Reputational harm and humiliation are real and lasting.
• Even if a later court reversed any decisions, the damage to the president’s dignity would remain.

Legal Reasoning

Judge le Grange noted that the court must consider the need for an injunction carefully. He said the second judgment correctly recognized the seriousness of the harm, while the first judgment missed the point by thinking any later reversal would fix things.

What Happens Next?

Review Application Date

Ramaphosa’s application to examine the independent panel’s report under Section 89 of the Constitution is set to be heard from September 2‑4, 2026.

Parliament’s Response

Speaker Moloto Mothapo said Parliament will study the judgment and decide how to move forward. The Speaker will look at the court’s reasons to see what impact the ruling has on the ongoing work of the National Assembly.

Statements from the Presidency

President Ramaphosa said he respects the court’s ruling. His spokesman, Vincent Magwenya, added that the president continues to honour the judiciary’s independence and will cooperate with any accountability processes required by the Constitution.

Background: How We Got Here

Earlier Constitutional Court Decision

In May, Chief Justice Mandisa Maya ruled that Parliament’s vote to reject the impeachment inquiry was unconstitutional. That decision kicked off the impeachment process after finding that Ramaphosa had committed serious misconduct by not reporting a theft at his Phala Phala farm, where foreign cash was stolen from a sofa in February 2020.

Conclusion

The Western Cape High Court’s decision to pause the impeachment hearings shows how the judiciary can step in when there is a risk of lasting harm to a public official. While the legal process continues, both the president and Parliament must now wait for the September review to determine the next steps in this high‑profile case.