Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala Court Bid Draws Sharp Rebuke as Parties Urge Judges to ‘Stay in Their Lane’
Image Source: The Guardian
By Mpho Tumelo Modise | EZA News
The Western Cape High Court has become the arena for one of the most consequential political battles of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s tenure.
Cape Town – Arguments before the Western Cape High Court on Wednesday placed the constitutional boundaries of presidential power under the sharpest scrutiny seen in recent years, as opposition parties united to resist President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent application to halt Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment process.
Ramaphosa is seeking a court interdict to suspend the parliamentary process while he challenges the findings of the independent panel that concluded there is a prima facie case for him to answer over the Phala Phala farm scandal – in which an undisclosed sum of foreign currency was allegedly concealed following a robbery at his Limpopo game farm.
The MK Party, the African Transformation Movement, and the United Africans Transformation all appeared in court to oppose the application. Their central argument was unambiguous: no court can interdict a process that flows directly from a Constitutional Court order. MK Party parliamentary leader Dr John Hlophe, speaking to journalists outside the court, was characteristically blunt, dismissing the application as a waste of both the court’s time and public resources.
The ATM’s parliamentary representative argued that reputational concern cannot be placed above Parliament’s constitutional obligation to hold the head of state accountable – a principle that, if allowed to erode, would fundamentally alter South Africa’s system of checks and balances.
The case cuts to the heart of a question South African constitutional democracy has not yet been required to answer with finality: whether a sitting president can use the courts to delay a process specifically designed by the Constitution as Parliament’s own domain. Judgment is expected in the coming days.
About The Author
