The Presidency and Parliament have both pledged to study and respect Friday’s landmark Constitutional Court judgment that revived the Section 89 impeachment process linked to President Cyril Ramaphosa and the Phala Phala scandal.
In separate statements issued hours after the ruling, the Presidency and Parliament struck a cautious tone, emphasising respect for the judiciary and constitutional processes following the court’s decision in favour of the Economic Freedom Fighters.
The Constitutional Court ruled that the National Assembly acted inconsistently with the Constitution when it decided in December 2022 not to establish an impeachment committee after receiving the Section 89 Independent Panel report into allegations against Ramaphosa.
The judgment declared Rule 129(i)(b) unconstitutional and set aside the National Assembly resolution that blocked further impeachment proceedings.
Responding on behalf of the Presidency, presidential spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said Ramaphosa respected the Constitutional Court’s decision and remained committed to the Constitution and the rule of law.
“The Presidency has noted the judgment of the Constitutional Court in the case brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters challenging the National Assembly’s decision with respect to Section 89 proceedings against the President,” Magwenya said.
“President Cyril Ramaphosa respects the Constitutional Court’s judgment and reaffirms his commitment to the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.”
The Presidency stressed that Ramaphosa had cooperated with all investigations and inquiries relating to the Phala Phala matter since it first emerged in 2022.
“President Ramaphosa has been consistent in providing his full assistance to the various enquiries into this matter,” Magwenya said.
The statement further reiterated Ramaphosa’s position that accountability processes should unfold through lawful and constitutional mechanisms.
“President Ramaphosa maintains that no person is above the law and that any allegations should be subjected to due process without fear, favour or prejudice.”
The Presidency also called on South Africans to respect both the Constitutional Court judgment and the country’s judicial institutions amid renewed political tensions expected to follow the ruling.
Meanwhile, Parliament said it would carefully examine the implications of the judgment for the National Assembly and its internal procedures governing impeachment proceedings.
Parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said the institution “notes and respects the judgment of the Constitutional Court in the matter brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters challenging the Sixth Parliament’s handling of the Section 89 Independent Panel Report relating to President Cyril Ramaphosa”.
“Parliament will carefully study and consider the Court’s judgment and its implications for the procedures of the National Assembly,” Mothapo said.
Parliament did not immediately indicate when or how it would begin implementing the ruling, but the judgment is expected to compel lawmakers to revisit the Section 89 process and establish an impeachment committee in line with constitutional requirements.
Friday’s ruling marks a significant development in the long-running Phala Phala controversy, which erupted after former spy boss Arthur Fraser accused Ramaphosa of concealing the theft of foreign currency from his Limpopo game farm.
The Section 89 Independent Panel, chaired by retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, previously found there was prima facie evidence that Ramaphosa may have committed serious violations of the Constitution and the law.
However, in December 2022, the ANC-majority National Assembly voted against adopting the panel’s findings and declined to establish an impeachment inquiry committee — a decision now overturned by the Constitutional Court.
While Friday’s judgment does not determine Ramaphosa’s guilt or innocence, it reopens the parliamentary accountability process and places renewed focus on the National Assembly’s constitutional oversight role.
The ruling has already triggered strong reactions from opposition parties, with several arguing that Parliament improperly shielded the President from scrutiny.
Political parties have sharply reacted to Friday’s Constitutional Court ruling that revived the Section 89 impeachment process linked to President Cyril Ramaphosa, with opposition formations welcoming the decision while others urged constitutional calm and due process.
The African Transformation Movement (ATM) said the ruling confirmed that Parliament cannot use procedure to shield political leaders from accountability.
ATM spokesperson Zama Ntshona said the judgment restored constitutional order and reinforced the duty of Parliament to act on the panel’s findings.
The party said the ruling was not about guilt but about ensuring that allegations of serious misconduct are properly tested through a lawful impeachment process.
RISE Mzansi also welcomed the judgment, with its leader Songezo Zibi warning against the abuse of parliamentary majorities.
Zibi said the court had made it clear that “majoritarianism must never override the Constitution” and stressed that all MPs must act in the public interest when exercising oversight powers.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) described the ruling as a significant win for accountability, arguing that Parliament had failed in its constitutional duty when it blocked further inquiry into the allegations.
DA leaders said the impeachment process must now proceed transparently and without political interference.
The governing African National Congress (ANC) said it respected the judgment and would engage it through parliamentary structures, reaffirming its commitment to constitutional democracy and the rule of law.
ANC leaders stressed that due process must be followed and cautioned against politicising the matter.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) said the ruling vindicated its long-standing position that Parliament unlawfully protected the President from scrutiny and called for immediate implementation of the court’s directive to establish an impeachment committee.
Across the political spectrum, parties agreed that while the judgment does not determine guilt or innocence, it fundamentally resets Parliament’s role in handling the Phala Phala matter and places renewed pressure on lawmakers to act in line with constitutional obligations.
But both the Presidency and Parliament sought on Friday to project institutional stability and respect for constitutional democracy as the country braces for the next phase of the politically charged Phala Phala saga.
