What Happened in Court?
The ATM’s Legal Challenge
On Wednesday, the African Transformation Movement (ATM) took President Cyril Ramaphosa to the Western Cape High Court. The party’s lawyer, Advocate Anton Katz SC, argued that Ramaphosa’s request to cancel the Section 89 panel report is premature and should be thrown out.
Why the ATM Says the Case Is Premature
Katz told the judges that Parliament is still handling the impeachment charges against the president. Unless there is a clear, unavoidable harm, the courts should stay out of the process. He said the founding papers show no evidence of material or irreversible damage that couldn’t be fixed later.
What the Section 89 Panel Found
- In November 2022, an independent panel chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo concluded there was enough evidence for Ramaphosa to face four impeachment charges.
- The charges relate to the alleged theft of about US$580,000 in foreign currency from his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo in February 2020.
- The panel recommended a public impeachment inquiry.
Parliament’s Response So Far
- The National Assembly voted in December 2022 not to continue with impeachment.
- On May 8, the Constitutional Court overturned that decision, ordering the report back to Parliament’s impeachment committee and reopening the case after more than three years.
- The impeachment committee was later barred by the same court from holding public hearings until Ramaphosa’s review application is decided.
The Court’s Current Hearing
A full bench of judges—Judge President Nolwazi Mabindla‑Boqwana, Judge Mark Sher, and Judge Ncumisa Mayosi—is hearing the matter. Arguments are expected to run through Friday.
Key Points from the Arguments
Katz’s Main Submission
- Ramaphosa should wait until the impeachment process finishes before challenging the panel’s findings in court.
- The proper route is for the National Assembly to deal with the issue; the courts should not intervene step‑by‑step.
- If the president believes the panel erred, he can raise his complaints with the impeachment committee after the inquiry ends.
Judges’ Questions and Concerns
- Judge Mabindla‑Boqwana asked whether there is any “bail‑out” for the president in the impeachment rules. Katz said the rules do not allow the committee to stop an inquiry on its own.
- Judge Sher wondered why Ramaphosa should appear before the committee if the evidence for the four charges is weak. He compared it to convicting someone of robbery without a charge.
- Judge Mayosi questioned why an impeachment hearing should happen at all if the panel didn’t find enough evidence to support the charges.
Trengove’s Counter‑Argument (Ramaphosa’s Lawyer)
- Wim Trengove SC said the panel asked the wrong question. It looked for a prima facie case (a low‑threshold test) instead of checking whether the conduct was deliberate and in bad faith—as required by parliamentary rules.
- He argued the panel ignored Ramaphosa’s defence and therefore its report is invalid.
- Trengove urged the court to set aside the entire report, claiming that if even one charge is flawed, the whole document falls apart.
What the Constitution Says About Impeachment
- The president must promote national unity.
- An impeachment process affects not just the individual but the whole country, which is why the courts are careful about stepping in.
Looking Ahead
Katz will return on Thursday to defend the panel’s report, aiming to show that the criticisms against it lack merit. The outcome will decide whether the impeachment inquiry proceeds or whether the court intervenes earlier than Parliament intended.
Bottom Line for Teens
- The legal fight is about who gets to decide if the president should face impeachment: Parliament or the courts.
- The ATM says let Parliament finish its work first; the president’s lawyers say the panel’s report is flawed and should be cancelled now.
- Judges are weighing the balance between respecting parliamentary process and protecting the president’s rights.
- Whatever the decision, it will shape how South Africa handles high‑level accountability in the future.
