CAPE TOWN, Western Cape — The legal battle surrounding the Cyril Ramaphosa Phala Phala saga intensified at the Western Cape High Court, as the president’s legal team continues its application to review and set aside the contentious Section 89 Independent Panel report. The panel previously found strong evidence suggesting the president may have violated his oath of office in connection with the 2020 theft at his private farm.
At the heart of the review is a sharp dispute over legal standards and executive accountability. Ramaphosa’s legal representatives argued that the independent panel applied an incorrect legal threshold. They asserted that the president fulfilled his constitutional duty by reporting the theft to Major General Wally Rhoode. According to this defense, any subsequent actions, decisions, or processes initiated by Rhoode should rest solely on the general, meaning the president cannot be held accountable for what followed after the initial report was made.
The application names nine respondents, which include several political parties represented in Parliament, as well as National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza.
Pushing back against the president’s legal strategy, representatives for the African Transformation Movement (ATM) characterized the review application as a deliberate delaying tactic. ATM MP Vuyo Zungula and ATM senior counsel Anton Katz argued that the move is designed to help the president avoid parliamentary accountability regarding the 2020 Phala Phala theft.
Advocate Anton Katz emphasized that it is incumbent upon the president to explain to the nation exactly what transpired. He noted that critical questions remain unanswered, including why there were large sums of money at the president’s home on the day of the incident and what precisely occurred regarding the subsequent sale. Katz stressed that the president must answer these questions simply because it is in the public interest, stating that the public demands to know the truth and that the president can no longer dodge accountability.
The court proceedings are scheduled to continue with the ATM presenting their opening arguments until early afternoon. Following this session, legal counsel representing the EFF is expected to take over the proceedings during the lunch interval, ensuring the scrutiny over the Section 89 report remains at the forefront of the judicial review.
