Ramaphosa Wins Court Ruling to Halt Impeachment Inquiry

A South African court has ruled in favor of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s request for a temporary halt to a parliamentary inquiry that could lead to his impeachment over the so-called “Farmgate” scandal.

The controversy began in 2020 when large sums of cash were stolen from Ramaphosa’s private farm, hidden within a sofa. An independent panel later suggested that the president might have to answer for the incident, which he has consistently denied any wrongdoing over.

Though MPs initially rejected the establishment of an impeachment inquiry, a significant shift occurred in May when the Constitutional Court declared that parliament had unlawfully shelved the panel’s report, granting new momentum to the impeachment process.

In response, Ramaphosa is also challenging the independent panel’s findings in a separate court case scheduled for September.

The Constitutional Court’s earlier ruling created a pathway for parliament to revive the impeachment process, which is particularly consequential given the changes in parliamentary dynamics; the African National Congress (ANC), Ramaphosa’s party, no longer holds a majority and governs within a coalition following the recent elections.

Following the Constitutional Court’s decision, Ramaphosa mounted a legal challenge, asserting that the independent panel had “misconceived its mandate, misjudged the information placed before it, and misinterpreted the four charges advanced against me.” On Friday, Western Cape High Court judge Andre le Grange ruled that the parliamentary committee must halt its hearings pending a review from Ramaphosa’s case.

This ruling effectively provides Ramaphosa with additional time, during which he aims to clear his name. His legal team argued that not halting the committee could inflict irreversible damage to his reputation.

The case was heard by three judges, and the majority ruling means that impeachment proceedings cannot progress until Ramaphosa’s case is resolved.

The saga traces back to a robbery at Phala Phala, Ramaphosa’s private farm in Limpopo province, where thieves made off with currency estimated at around $580,000 (£430,000) that had been stuffed into a sofa.

Theireveal of the theft only emerged in 2022 when former spy chief Arthur Fraser disclosed the incident in a report submitted to the police, claiming that Ramaphosa concealed the event from authorities and that potential foreign currency exchange laws may have been violated.

Ramaphosa has maintained that the money stemmed from the sale of buffaloes. In a statement following the court’s ruling, he expressed his respect for the court’s decision.

The ruling has sparked a variety of reactions among political parties. The Democratic Alliance, the second-largest party in the governing coalition, stated they were not surprised by the ruling but asserted it wouldn’t prevent the committee from continuing its preparatory work. Conversely, the opposition party led by Jacob Zuma, uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), accused Ramaphosa of using the legal system to obstruct the investigation into his farm’s scandal.

Meanwhile, the ANC welcomed the ruling, urging other parties to refrain from what they described as politically motivated distortions as the legal process unfolds.