EFF Reacts to Constitutional Court’s Decision on Ramaphosa Impeachment Pause

What Happened?

The Western Cape High Court stopped Parliament’s impeachment inquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa until a review application he filed is finished. The court said the hearings of the Section 89 Impeachment Committee must wait while Ramaphosa tries to overturn a report that found he had a case to answer.

Who Asked for a Fast‑Track Appeal?

ATM leader Vuyo Zungula, together with the EFF, the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MK Party) and United Africans Transformation (UAT), asked the Constitutional Court to hear an urgent appeal directly. They wanted the top court to decide whether the high court’s pause was lawful.

Constitutional Court’s Ruling

Why the Court Said No

The Constitutional Court explained two main reasons for refusing the request:

• The outcome of Ramaphosa’s review application will likely make the interim order irrelevant, so hearing the appeal now would be pointless.
• There was no sufficient basis to allow a replying affidavit or to grant leave to appeal at this stage.

The court also said it would not award costs to either side.

What the EFF Said

EFF spokesperson Thembi Msane called the decision “disappointing.” She argued that labeling the review as “imminent” is misleading because the hearing is set for early September, but judgment could take months—or even over a year—based on past cases like the Phala Phala matter.

Msane warned that keeping Parliament’s impeachment process on hold for an uncertain period weakens the legislature’s power to hold the executive accountable.

Why the EFF Is Concerned

Separation of Powers at Stake

The EFF believes that if a court can stop a parliamentary accountability process without a quick, final ruling on its legality, future Parliaments could be blocked more easily. This creates uncertainty about when and how courts might interfere with parliamentary work.

Impact on Parliamentary Preparations

Even though the Impeachment Committee continues to prepare—drafting terms of reference, meeting next week, and arranging evidence leaders—the inability to hold public hearings stalls the actual investigative work. Msane said it’s meaningless to keep preparing if the committee can’t carry out its mandate.

What’s Next?

The Impeachment Committee chairperson, Makashule Gana, said the panel will keep working on its preparations as directed by the Western Cape High Court. They plan to finalize the terms of reference soon and update appointments for evidence leaders.

Meanwhile, the EFF and its allies will likely keep pushing for a clearer judicial determination on whether the high court’s interruption of the Section 89 process is constitutional.

Conclusion

The Constitutional Court’s refusal to hear an urgent appeal leaves the Western Cape High Court’s pause on President Ramaphosa’s impeachment inquiry in place—for now. The EFF warns that this delay could erode Parliament’s ability to check the executive and calls for a swift resolution so the Section 89 process can move forward without unnecessary obstruction.