The EFF and ATM have questioned the legalities surrounding the ANC majority vote against an independent report that showed that there was a case against President Cyril Ramaphosa on the Phala Phala matter.
The hearing comes after the EFF challenged the Speaker of the National Assembly over the Section 89 panel report regarding the Phala Phala matter.
This is in relation to the $580, 000 (R9, 041 427) that was allegedly stolen from under the sofa at the president’s game farm in Limpopo.
National Assembly rejected motion for impeachment
The court battle was mounted after the National Assembly rejected a motion to refer the report to an impeachment committee. The report was compiled by an independent panel led by retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo.
According to the report, there was a prima facie case for which Ramaphosa had to answer.
However, the majority vote in parliament had the opposite result. It led to the National Assembly’s decision not to institute an impeachment inquiry against Ramaphosa.
The two opposition parties approached the Constitutional Court. They are seeking that the court set aside the decision of the National Assembly.
Kameel Premhid, EFF legal representative, explained the dynamics. He said that the relief that the EFF is seeking would not breach the principle of separation of powers.
Premhid explained what approaching the court meant. It is not a mere attack on the National Assembly’s ability to not support an impeachment inquiry. He said it is but rather focused on the specifics of the case.
Premhid argued that the votes that blocked the impeachment inquiry should be overlooked. He highlighted that the constitution allowed the court to do so when confronted with unlawfulness.
Court questions the delay in this action by EFF, ATM
Justice Rammaka Mathopo questioned the delay on the matter. This raises concerns that the matter was already decided on in the previous administration, he said.
He said he does not understand the argument brought before him. That the MPs who voted against the independent panel were forced into making an illegal decision.
He highlighted that the red berets might be insulting the MPs’ intelligence. This by insinuating that they only decide on what they are told and not what they wish for.
He said the application created a difficult situation in that the court is expected to infiltrate the political space. And to also tell the MPs that their voting was wrong. He said it was normal that party members vote alongside their political lines in the country.
“Every MP is a member of a political party. Why is this conscience applying to the ANC only? People who want to be independents and don’t want party discipline must go and contest as independents,” said Mathopo.
