The atmosphere inside Parliament turned combustible on Thursday when opposition MPs attempted to block President Cyril Ramaphosa from addressing the National Assembly, arguing that South Africa could not continue as if it were “business as usual” while impeachment clouds gathered over his presidency following the recent Constitutional Court ruling on the Phala Phala scandal matter.
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza faced a strong procedural rebellion as members of the progressive caucus, including the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP), EFF, and African Transformation Movement (ATM), demanded urgent parliamentary intervention before Ramaphosa could take the podium for his question-and-answer (Q&A) session.
The political temperature rose almost immediately when MKP chief whip Mmabatho Mokoena-Zondi rose to demand that Didiza respond to a letter submitted on behalf of the progressive caucus seeking an urgent motion of no confidence debate against the president.
President ‘undermining constitution’
“We cannot continue today as if everything is normal while we have a president in front of us who has continuously been living under a shadow and facing impeachment processes,” Mokoena-Zondi charged.
Her remarks landed like a lit match in a chamber already simmering with post-ConCourt tension after the apex court reopened the parliamentary pathway for impeachment proceedings linked to the Phala Phala saga.
Didiza acknowledged receiving the letter but cautioned that the matter could not simply be inserted into the day’s proceedings.
“That cannot happen today,” Didiza responded, attempting to restore order. But the opposition benches refused to retreat quietly.
“We cannot continue to legitimise his presidency,” Mokoena-Zondi fired back. “There is an emergency that we need to discuss in this house.”
EFF MP Nontando Nolutshungu then joined the attack, accusing Ramaphosa of undermining constitutional principles.
“We respect this house. We therefore cannot sit here and listen to someone who doesn’t respect the Constitution,” Nolutshungu said.
Didiza warned against pattern of silence
ATM leader Vuyo Zungula argued that Parliament’s first duty after the Constitutional Court ruling should have been to brief South Africans on the implications facing the president.
“This is the first time this house is meeting after the Constitutional Court ruling. The first thing you should do is inform South Africans that the president is effectively charged and will face impeachment,” Zungula said.
Although Ramaphosa has not been criminally charged, the Constitutional Court ruling has revived Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment machinery after the court found flaws in how the National Assembly previously handled the matter.
Parliament has since begun implementing steps toward a possible impeachment inquiry, including the establishment of a multi-party Section 89 committee expected to assess whether sufficient grounds exist for further proceedings against the president.
Zungula also took a swipe at former speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula, who spoke out against ANC MPs to podcaster Mbuyiseni Ndlozi this week, warning Didiza not to follow what he described as a pattern of silence within Parliament.
Eventually, members of the progressive caucus staged a dramatic walkout moments before Ramaphosa rose to address the assembly, leaving visible political cracks across the parliamentary floor as the president prepared to face MPs under the growing shadow of impeachment talk.
- Opposition MPs from the progressive caucus (MKP, EFF, ATM) attempted to block President Cyril Ramaphosa from addressing the National Assembly, citing the Constitutional Court ruling on the Phala Phala scandal and ongoing impeachment threats.
- They demanded urgent parliamentary intervention and a no-confidence debate, arguing it was inappropriate to proceed with normal business while the president faced serious allegations.
- Speaker Thoko Didiza acknowledged the demands but stated the no-confidence motion could not be included in the day's proceedings, sparking heightened tensions and accusations that Ramaphosa was undermining constitutional principles.
- The Constitutional Court ruling revived impeachment processes under Parliament’s Section 89, prompting steps toward a potential inquiry, including forming a multi-party committee to assess grounds for impeachment.
- The session ended with a dramatic walkout by progressive MPs just before Ramaphosa’s address, highlighting deep political divisions amid escalating impeachment scrutiny.
National
“We cannot continue today as if everything is normal while we have a president in front of us who has continuously been living under a shadow and facing impeachment processes,” Mokoena-
Her remarks landed like a lit match in a chamber already simmering with post-ConCourt tension after the apex court reopened the parliamentary pathway for impeachment proceedings linked to the Phala Phala saga.
Didiza acknowledged receiving the letter but cautioned that the matter could not simply be inserted into the day’s proceedings.
“
“We cannot continue to legitimise his presidency,” Mokoena-
EFF MP
“We respect this house. We therefore cannot sit here and to someone who doesn't respect the Constitution,”
ATM leader Vuyo
“
Parliament has since begun implementing steps toward a possible impeachment inquiry, including the establishment of a multi-party Section 89 committee expected to assess whether sufficient grounds exist for further proceedings against the president.
Eventually, members of the progressive caucus staged a dramatic walkout moments before Ramaphosa rose to address the assembly, leaving visible political cracks across the parliamentary floor as the president prepared to face MPs under the growing shadow of impeachment talk.
