CAPE TOWN, WESTERN CAPE – The Economic Freedom Fighters have pushed back aggressively against President Cyril Ramaphosa’s latest legal maneuver, with party spokesperson Sinawo Thambo dismissing the urgent application at the Western Cape High Court to halt the parliamentary impeachment process as a desperate delaying tactic.
At the heart of the legal dispute is the President’s attempt to review and set aside the Section 89 Independent Panel Report. This report previously established prima facie evidence suggesting potential constitutional and legal violations regarding the Phala Phala matter. In his court filings, Ramaphosa argues that proceeding with impeachment before a review court determines the report’s validity would cause him irreversible prejudice. He contends that allowing the consequences of the report to materialize would undermine the review proceedings and strip him of substantial redress, claiming he has exhausted other remedies by writing to the Speaker and the committee chairperson without success.
However, Thambo completely rejected these assertions, labeling the President’s arguments as “ridiculous.” He argued that Ramaphosa is deploying a multitude of legal ramblings simply to stall the impeachment committee’s mandate. Citing paragraph 139 of the Constitutional Court’s judgment, the EFF MP emphasized that the committee’s work is legally mandated to continue until the Chief Justice’s Section 89 report is formally set aside. Thambo clarified a fundamental legal distinction to the public: merely filing an application for an interdict does not equate to an interdict actually being granted.
Delving into the President’s motives, Thambo questioned Ramaphosa’s commitment to his own integrity. He pointed out that if the President were genuinely concerned about the findings, he would have initiated a review of the independent panel’s report back in 2022. According to the EFF spokesperson, Ramaphosa abstained from doing so at the time because he mistakenly believed he commanded a parliamentary majority capable of suppressing the report—a move that was ultimately declared unconstitutional.
Addressing the President’s claims of impending reputational harm, Thambo noted that both the Section 89 findings and the Phala Phala iPad report are already public documents. He challenged the logic of the President’s fears, asking what further consequences could possibly occur. Thambo suggested that Ramaphosa is either casting unwarranted aspersions on the efficiency of the South African judiciary—implying the courts are too slow to reach finality—or his true motive is purely self-preservation.
“He is engaged in something very personal that is not in the interest of law, not in the interest of transparency, [and] not in the interest of constitutionalism,” Thambo stated, dismissing the arguments as frivolous. He added that the President’s core motive is to protect his personal reputation rather than ensure accountability, noting there is no reputational damage left to suffer beyond what has already occurred.
Looking ahead, the EFF confirmed it will formally oppose the urgent application, joining the African Transformation Movement (ATM), which has also signaled its intent to fight the court bid. Thambo expressed absolute confidence that the President’s attempt to stifle the committee will be defeated in court. Meanwhile, the legislative clock keeps ticking; the impeachment committee is slated to convene for its inaugural meeting following the recent election of its chairperson on June 24, 2026. Thambo vowed that the EFF would be present at the June 24 sitting to ensure that no “illogical” legal arguments succeed in derailing Parliament’s oversight over the executive.