National Assembly Speaker Addresses Impeachment Committee Concerns

What Happened?

National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza told reporters that Parliament is carrying out its duties and there is no reason for alarm. Her comments came after accusations surfaced that she met with President Cyril Ramaphosa’s legal team regarding the Phala Phala matter.

Why the Concern?

DA faction leader George Michalakis raised the issue during a meeting of the Assembly Rules Review Subcommittee. He asked whether Didiza had sought legal advice about how to handle Ramaphosa’s request to review the independent panel’s report.

Michalakis said there were widespread rumors that the speaker had met with the president’s lawyers. If true, he argued, it could jeopardize the impartiality of the impeachment process and might require Didiza to step aside.

Michalakis’ Questions

He wanted to know:

• Didiza’s contact with legal advisers about the review application.
• Whether she could continue to preside without affecting the outcome.
• What the parliamentary rules say about recusal in such situations.

Michalakis emphasized that the legal advisers have a duty to provide a clear answer so MPs can decide on any needed action.

Legal Advisers’ Response

State legal counsel Andrew Breytenbach said he could not comment on Didiza’s statement or any alleged meeting with the president’s lawyers. He noted that any questions about the speaker’s actions should be directed to her directly.

ANC’s Perspective

ANC MP Mikateko Mahlaule reminded everyone that a court ruling already ordered Didiza to publish the independent panel’s report and send it to the Rules Committee. He argued that questioning the speaker’s impartiality is misplaced because, according to the court, the matter is not currently before Parliament.

Mahlaule added that MPs use Mondays for constituency work, so meetings with various individuals are normal and not inherently problematic.

MK Party’s View

MK Party MP Mzwanele Manyi agreed with Michalakis’ concerns, saying the more he thought about it, the more serious the situation seemed. He warned that the issue could have far‑reaching consequences if not addressed properly.

Speaker’s Response

Didiza told reporters she had complied with the court’s order. She said there is nothing that should worry anyone about Parliament fulfilling its responsibilities. She also noted that the court case focused on Parliament’s failure to follow its own procedures.

What the Court Said

The Constitutional Court found Parliamentary Rule 129I unconstitutional and struck it down. The judgment indicated how the rule should look after amendment. Importantly, the court said Parliament should not have sent the panel’s report straight to the Constitutional Court; instead, it must go to the Impeachment Committee first.

Didiza added that Parliament will wait for President Ramaphosa’s court application, then seek legal advice and decide how to respond.

Next Steps

Awaiting Legal Opinion

Michalakis has sent letters to Didiza asking for clarification. He is now waiting for the parliamentary legal advisers to give a legal opinion on whether the speaker can continue in her role without compromising the process.

Potential Recusal

If the legal opinion determines that Didiza’s meeting with the president’s lawyers creates a conflict, she may need to recuse herself to protect the integrity of the impeachment inquiry.

Moving Forward

Parliament intends to follow the court’s directive: publish the report, forward it to the Impeachment Committee, and then consider any further steps based on the president’s legal application.

Conclusion

The debate over Speaker Thoko Didiza’s alleged meeting with President Ramaphosa’s legal team highlights the importance of transparency and adherence to parliamentary rules. While Didiza insists she has acted correctly and sees no cause for concern, opposition members are calling for a clear legal opinion to ensure the impeachment process remains fair and unbiased. The coming days will reveal whether any procedural changes or recusals are needed to maintain public trust in Parliament’s work.