The Western Cape High Court has temporarily halted parliamentary impeachment proceedings against South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, granting an interim order that suspends public hearings into the long-running Phala Phala (“Farmgate”) scandal pending the determination of his legal challenge to the process.
The ruling prevents Parliament’s Section 89 Impeachment Committee from continuing its inquiry while the court considers Ramaphosa’s application to review the legality of a 2022 independent panel report, which concluded that the president “may have committed” serious constitutional violations and misconduct.
Delivering the judgment, Judge André le Grange ordered that:
“Pending the determination by this court of the applicant’s review … respondents are interdicted from proceeding with a public impeachment hearing.”
The impeachment proceedings stem from the Phala Phala scandal, which erupted after the 2020 theft of about $580,000 in foreign currency hidden inside a sofa at Ramaphosa’s game farm. The president has consistently denied any wrongdoing, maintaining that the cash represented proceeds from the sale of buffaloes and rejecting calls to resign.
Although the court’s decision delays the parliamentary inquiry, it does not terminate the impeachment process. The review application challenging the independent panel’s findings is scheduled to be heard in September, after which the court will determine whether the impeachment proceedings can resume.
Ramaphosa’s spokesperson said the president respects the court’s ruling and remains committed to cooperating with constitutional accountability processes. Meanwhile, the Democratic Alliance, a key partner in South Africa’s governing coalition, urged the courts to resolve the matter swiftly, arguing that South Africans deserve clarity on the allegations against the president.
Political analysts note that even if the impeachment process eventually proceeds, Ramaphosa is widely expected to retain office, as his African National Congress (ANC) and its allies are considered to have sufficient parliamentary support to block any motion seeking his removal.
