South Africa’s parliamentary committee responsible for considering impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa has resolved to appeal a Western Cape High Court ruling that temporarily halted its public hearings relating to the Phala Phala matter.
According to a statement issued by the South African Parliament, the committee reached the decision following a legal briefing from Parliament’s Legal Services Division, which outlined the implications of the court’s judgment. The ruling prevents the committee from proceeding with public hearings while President Ramaphosa’s application to review aspects of the impeachment process remains before the courts.
The committee also determined that members of the independent panel whose report gave rise to the impeachment process will not be called to give evidence. Parliament stated that the panel’s mandate concluded upon submission of its report and that, once appointed, evidence leaders will instead guide the committee through the panel’s findings together with the supporting documentation.
Parliament further confirmed that the committee was unable to conclude all items on its agenda because of extensive deliberations during the meeting. Outstanding matters include the consideration of nominations for evidence leaders and the approval of draft terms of reference for the inquiry. The committee is expected to reconvene on 5 August and again on 7 August.
The legal dispute forms part of the continuing proceedings arising from the Phala Phala matter, which centres on the reported theft of approximately US$580,000 in cash from President Ramaphosa’s private game farm in Limpopo Province during 2020. The incident prompted public debate and legal scrutiny regarding the circumstances surrounding the funds and whether applicable reporting obligations were met.
President Ramaphosa has consistently rejected allegations of wrongdoing. In June, he lodged an urgent application seeking to suspend the committee’s work pending judicial review of the impeachment process. That application followed an earlier legal challenge in which he asked the Western Cape High Court to review and set aside the findings of the independent panel.
The independent panel, chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, concluded in its report that there was prima facie evidence warranting further consideration by Parliament. The National Assembly subsequently voted against adopting the report and did not proceed with impeachment at that stage.
The parliamentary process was later revived following a ruling by South Africa’s Constitutional Court, which found that the National Assembly had acted unlawfully in the manner in which it dealt with the independent panel’s report. The judgment required Parliament to reconsider the matter in accordance with constitutional obligations, leading to the establishment of the current impeachment committee.
The latest court order and the committee’s decision to appeal illustrate the continuing interaction between South Africa’s judiciary and legislature in resolving constitutional questions surrounding executive accountability. The outcome of the appeal, together with the pending judicial review, is expected to shape the next phase of the parliamentary process.
The developments are being closely observed across Southern Africa, where constitutional governance, institutional independence and accountability mechanisms remain central to democratic practice. The proceedings also underscore the role of constitutional institutions in addressing disputes through established legal processes while safeguarding the separation of powers.
