Political parties divided after court halts Ramaphosa impeachment hearings

The court on Friday granted an interim interdict preventing public impeachment hearings from proceeding, pending the outcome of the president's review application challenging the Independent Panel's findings on the Phala Phala matter.

The ANC welcomed the ruling, describing it as a victory for due process and constitutional rights.

ANC MP Mikateko Mahlaule said the judgment confirms that the president is entitled to seek legal relief like any other citizen.

"The judgment really affirms that everyone in South Africa has a right, including the president himself… it says the president has sought relief up until the review has been finalised and that is it."

He emphasised that the ruling does not deal with the merits of the case.

"We call on parties to respect and not go out and say this judgment has to do with merits… it has nothing to do with that."

Mahlaule also argued that Parliament's work would resume once the review process is complete and would proceed within a framework of fairness.

However, opposition parties have criticised the development, warning it could delay accountability.

DA chief whip Glynnis Breytenbach described the situation as unusual and concerning.

"It's a very important decision for the separation of powers, and it needs to be studied very carefully."

Breytenbach added that it is “a bizarre set of circumstances” that a sitting president would approach the courts to stop Parliament from carrying out its oversight function.

Despite the interdict, she indicated that the impeachment committee could continue with internal preparations.

"We can do the administrative work. We can appoint the evidence leaders, settle the witness lists."

Section 89 Impeachment Committee chairperson Makashule Gana also urged caution, saying the committee is awaiting the full judgment before determining its next steps.

"We now await the full judgment from what I heard is that it’s only the public hearings that have been interdicted."

Gana noted that clarity is needed on whether other aspects of the process, such as evidence gathering and procedural preparations, may continue.

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have also raised concerns about the ruling's implications for parliamentary accountability, arguing that the impeachment process is necessary to establish the truth.

EFF MP Nonthando Nolutshungu stressed that the process should not be stalled, as it is intended to determine whether there is sufficient evidence for wrongdoing and to ensure transparency for the public.

"You can't then stop a process of accountability; South Africans are going to get the truth."

The party further maintained that the independent panel's findings only established that there is a case to answer, and that a full inquiry is required to determine guilt or innocence.

Additionally, uMkhonto weSizwe Party MP, Andile Mngxitama, said the party remains critical of the president’s handling of the Phala Phala matter and believes Ramaphosa should appear before the Impeachment Committee.

"This is a delaying tactic, and it's highly disappointing that the judges would accept the argument that his reputation would be negatively affected, and therefore grant him his request for a stay of this matter."

The High Court’s ruling has effectively paused one of the most significant political processes facing the president, with the review application expected to be heard in September.

The outcome of that review will likely determine whether impeachment proceedings resume or fall away entirely.

READ MORE