CAPE TOWN, WESTERN CAPE — The Section 89 Impeachment Committee is advancing its Phala Phala probe into President Cyril Ramaphosa, convening in Cape Town to appoint Evidence Leaders and finalize its terms of reference despite ongoing legal hurdles and parliamentary friction. The 31-member body is pushing forward with its inquisitorial mandate to investigate the President following the National Assembly’s adoption of amended rules to guide the process.
The newly adopted rules were implemented to comply with a May Constitutional Court ruling that compelled the legislature to update the Section 89 process. However, the legislative adjustments were not without debate. During yesterday’s session, the Democratic Alliance proposed a “fit and proper” requirement for members serving on the impeachment committee. This motion faced significant pushback, as lawmakers noted that enforcing such a standard would require a constitutional amendment to Section 47, which governs the eligibility and disqualifications of National Assembly members. Furthermore, several MPs voiced strong criticism regarding the National Assembly Speaker’s decision not to oppose the President’s urgent application to interdict the impeachment proceedings.
The primary objective of the committee is to test the veracity of the prima facie findings established by the Section 89 independent panel, which previously concluded that the President may have violated the constitution and the law. These findings stem from the 2020 theft of over $500,000 USD at the President’s Phala Phala game farm.
Ahead of today’s critical session, the leader of the EFF—also referred to as the leader of the Red Berets—submitted formal correspondence to the committee’s chairperson, Makashana. The letter urgently requests the appointment of forensic investigators to assist the inquisitorial body in uncovering the truth behind the charges. The EFF argued that relying on forensic expertise is crucial to avoid being caught on the “back foot,” a vulnerability observed in previous ad hoc committees, such as the one recently investigating the minister currently on special leave.
While the committee works to establish its operational framework, it has drawn sharp rebukes regarding its pace. A spokesperson for the MK Party heavily criticized the committee during submissions before the national legislature, arguing that nearly two months have elapsed since the Constitutional Court’s decision with minimal implementation of the court’s order.
The MK Party spokesperson detailed that the committee has thus far only met to elect a chairperson and to consider his stance on what they termed a “misguided interdict application,” with a third meeting still pending simply to discuss the appointment of an evidence leader.
“Two meetings, none of them an inquiry. There is no sense of urgency,” the MK spokesperson stated, expressing deep frustration over the lack of tangible progress.
The party further alleged that the slow pace is a deliberate tactic, claiming the committee is chaired by a “fellow traveler of the so-called GNU.” According to the MK Party, whether by coincidence or design, the objective is to string the process along. They argue this delay is intended to give the high court time to undermine the Constitutional Court’s order, ultimately achieving what an “unlawful vote of this house” previously failed to accomplish.