WC High Court to rule on Ramaphosa's impeachment interdict application
The Western Cape High Court is expected to rule on President Cyril Ramaphosa's urgent application for an interdict, preventing the impeachment committee from continuing with its work until the completion of a review into the Section 89 report into the Phala Phala.
The ruling is expected to be delivered by the full bench of the High Court on Friday.
Executive Secretary of the Council for the Advancement of the South African Constitution (CASAC), Lawson Naidoo, said if the court ruled in favour of Ramaphosa's application, the committee would have to stop its work.
They would, however, still be able to complete preliminary processes such as appointing an evidence leader.
The impeachment process was set into motion after the Constitutional Court ruled in May that the National Assembly's vote to set aside the Section 89 report, into Phala Phala game farm robbery, was unconstitutional.
READ: ConCourt overturns Parliament’s Phala Phala decision, revives impeachment pathway
Naidoo said if the court rules against Ramaphosa's application the impeachment committee would be able to proceed with its work unhindered.
"[The committee] will proceed with the inquiry, of course, pending the outcome of the main review application," said Naidoo.
Naidoo said this application by Ramaphosa is not necessarily a delaying tactic.
"Quite often in matters of this nature, a temporary interdict is sought.
"The president's argument is that he would be irreparably harmed or prejudiced if the inquiry were to go ahead on the basis of, what he believes is a flawed report; and therefore, the delay would be literally a few months.
"So, yes, there is inevitably a delay, but I don't think it's a, it's necessarily a tactic to delay, but really to assert the rights of the President believes that he has."
He added that if Ramaphosa succeeds in his application to set aside the Section 89 report it would terminate the parliamentary process.
Naidoo said there would be no way for the impeachment committee to conduct its own investigation if the report was set aside.
"There has to be a basis because this is the process set out in the rules of the National Assembly, that firstly, there must be a valid motion, which there was, then there must be a report of an independent panel, which has to find that there is sufficient evidence for the president to answer a case.
"If the court then rules that that report does not make out such a case, then there would be no basis for Parliament to continue with its impeachment process," Naidoo added.
ALSO READ
