Keypoints:
- Court says parliament acted unlawfully in 2022 vote
- Impeachment process over Phala Phala scandal revived
- Coalition tensions could deepen for ANC government
SOUTH Africa’s Constitutional Court has revived impeachment proceedings against Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala cash scandal, reopening one of the country’s most politically damaging controversies.
In a ruling delivered Friday, South Africa’s highest judicial authority said parliament acted inconsistently with the constitution when lawmakers blocked an impeachment process against Ramaphosa in December 2022.
The decision forces parliament to reconsider an independent panel report that found the president may have violated the constitution through his handling of the scandal, widely known in South Africa as ‘Farmgate’.
The ruling could deepen pressure on the ANC-led coalition government and reignite debate over executive accountability in South Africa’s post-apartheid democracy.
Ramaphosa responded cautiously after the judgment, saying he respected the court’s decision and remained committed to constitutional accountability.
‘The president has always maintained that no person is above the law and that all persons, including himself, are subject to and bound by the constitution,’ his office said in a statement following the ruling.
Court overturns 2022 parliamentary decision
The Constitutional Court ruled that parliament unlawfully prevented the panel’s findings from being referred to an impeachment committee, effectively halting accountability proceedings against the president.
The judges ordered lawmakers to send the report to an impeachment committee for further consideration, reigniting a politically charged parliamentary process that had appeared dormant since 2022.
The legal challenge was brought by Julius Malema’s Economic Freedom Fighters, which argued that parliament failed in its constitutional oversight responsibilities.
A smaller opposition party later joined the case.
The ruling does not remove Ramaphosa from office, nor does it amount to a finding of criminal guilt.
Instead, it reopens a parliamentary mechanism that could investigate whether the president committed serious misconduct.
The judgment nonetheless represents a significant political setback for Ramaphosa and the governing African National Congress at a time when the party is already navigating coalition pressures after losing its parliamentary majority in the 2024 elections.
Africa Briefing previously examined the wider political fallout surrounding the Phala Phala controversy and the growing scrutiny facing the presidency.
Phala Phala scandal returns to spotlight
The controversy centres on allegations that Ramaphosa attempted to conceal the theft of foreign currency from his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo province in 2020.
A former intelligence official accused the president of hiding details surrounding the burglary, including the amount of money stolen and the circumstances under which it was stored.
Ramaphosa acknowledged that a break-in occurred at the farm but denied wrongdoing.
He said the stolen funds — about $580,000 — were proceeds from the sale of buffaloes to a foreign buyer. The president disputed allegations that around $4m had been hidden inside furniture on the property.
Although Ramaphosa was never criminally charged, an independent parliamentary panel concluded in 2022 that there was evidence suggesting he may have committed misconduct and violated constitutional obligations.
The ANC later used its parliamentary majority to block the report from advancing to impeachment proceedings, a move now overturned by the Constitutional Court.
Africa Briefing earlier reported on how the EFF escalated the dispute through the courts, intensifying pressure on the South African leader.
Coalition politics complicate response
The ruling arrives during a more fragile political era for the ANC, which now governs through a broad coalition arrangement after losing its outright majority in last year’s national election.
That shift has increased the influence of coalition partners and opposition parties over major parliamentary decisions.
The case may test relations inside the ANC’s governing coalition, particularly if opposition parties push for an aggressive parliamentary inquiry.
Following Friday’s judgment, the Democratic Alliance, the ANC’s largest coalition partner, said it would fully participate in the impeachment committee process and would not prejudge the outcome.
The DA’s position could become politically important if tensions emerge within the governing coalition over how aggressively parliament pursues the inquiry.
Opposition groups meanwhile portrayed the ruling as a victory for constitutional accountability and judicial independence.
The reopened impeachment proceedings also revive debate over earlier prosecutorial decisions after authorities previously declined to pursue charges linked to the theft case, as Africa Briefing reported in its coverage of why South African prosecutors chose not to charge Ramaphosa.
What happens next
Parliament must now formally refer the independent panel’s findings to an impeachment committee, which will determine whether sufficient grounds exist for further action against the president.
Any eventual impeachment vote would still face a high constitutional threshold in parliament.
Analysts say the immediate impact is more political than legal, with the revived impeachment proceedings likely to intensify scrutiny of Ramaphosa ahead of future electoral and policy battles.
The case also reopens broader questions about transparency, executive accountability and institutional credibility in South Africa’s post-apartheid democracy.
