The Constitutional Court has outlined the directions in former President Jacob Zuma and his MK Party’s challenge against President Cyril Ramaphosa, accusing him of failing to fulfil his constitutional obligations and violating his oath of office.
The dispute centres on Ramaphosa’s recent decisions to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on leave. To also appoint Professor Firoz Cachalia as Acting Minister of Police and establish a Judicial Commission of Inquiry.
Date set for Wednesday
On Friday the apex court scheduled the hearing date for Wednesday, July 30, 2025, at 11am.
“Applicants must file heads of argument by Sunday, 27 July 2025, at 14h00. Respondents must file heads of argument by Monday, 28 July 2025, at 14h00,” the court directed.
John Hlophe, Deputy President of the MKP and Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly, filed the founding affidavit. He outlined the party’s grievances and called for urgent judicial intervention. Hlophe argues that Ramaphosa’s actions are unconstitutional, irrational, and tainted by political bias.
The affidavit takes aim at Ramaphosa’s decision to place Mchunu on a leave of absence. It describes this as “irrational” and “ultra vires”.
He stated: “There is no empowering provision for the President to place a Minister on leave of absence, which is a fancy phrase for suspension with pay. The decision is therefore ultra vires.”
Hlophe further alleged that the decision was influenced by political favouritism. He noted Mchunu’s close ties to Ramaphosa.
“It is an open secret that Minister Mchunu is one of the president’s closest allies in the ANC factional battles.
Multiple ministers in same portfolio
“The inference is therefore irresistible that were it not for their political and factional affinities, President Ramaphosa would have duly dismissed Mchunu, as he is perfectly entitled and legally empowered to do.”
The affidavit also highlights the financial implications of Ramaphosa’s decisions. Particularly the appointment of multiple ministers to the same portfolio.
“As we currently speak, there are notionally three ministers of police appointed by the same president. This is a plain absurdity and nothing short of a royal mess,” Hlophe stated.
He argued that taxpayers are being burdened with unnecessary expenses.
“The decision is irrational in that it will result in the taxpayers’ rights being violated. They must pay two separate multi-million rand salaries and benefits for two ministers. One is acting, and the other is on leave for an indeterminate period of time.”
Appointment unconstitutional
Hlophe also criticised Ramaphosa’s appointment of Cachalia, calling it unconstitutional.
“Among other things, this betrays the fact that the president had irrationally failed to apply his mind to the pertinent and relevant provisions of section 98, which is applicable to the appointment of an acting minister.
“This alone constitutes a fatal failure to fulfil a constitutional obligation that is exclusively entrusted to the president,” Hlophe argued.
He pointed out that Cachalia is neither a member of the Cabinet nor the National Assembly. Thus, making the appointment inconsistent with constitutional requirements.
