President Cyril Ramaphosa has vowed not to resign despite mounting political pressure following last week’s landmark Constitutional Court judgment on the Phala Phala scandal, saying he will instead challenge the Section 89 independent panel report through a judicial review process.

In a nationally televised address from the Union Buildings on Monday evening, Ramaphosa defended his decision to remain in office and insisted the Constitutional Court had made no finding that he committed misconduct or violated the Constitution.

“I therefore respectfully want to make it clear that I will not resign,” Ramaphosa said.

“To do so would be to pre-empt a process defined by the Constitution. To do so would be to give credence to a panel report that unfortunately has grave flaws.”

The address came days after the Constitutional Court ruled that aspects of Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment rules were unconstitutional and set aside the National Assembly’s December 2022 decision not to proceed with an impeachment inquiry against the President.

The apex court ordered that the report of the independent panel chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo be referred to Parliament’s impeachment committee.

The panel had found prima facie evidence suggesting Ramaphosa may have committed serious misconduct and violated the Constitution over the handling of the 2020 theft at his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo.

Ramaphosa on Monday reiterated that he had done nothing wrong and maintained that no evidence had proven he committed any crime or breached his oath of office.

He said he accepted and respected the Constitutional Court judgment, but argued the ruling also recognised his right to challenge the independent panel’s findings through judicial review proceedings.

“The Constitutional Court judgment last week means that the report of the independent panel now has legal consequence,” Ramaphosa said.

“On the basis of advice from my legal team… I have therefore decided to proceed to take the independent panel’s report on review on an expeditious basis.”

The President argued that resigning would destabilise the country at a time of economic and political uncertainty and undermine efforts to rebuild state institutions weakened during the State Capture era.

“To resign now would be to give in to those who seek to reverse the renewal of our society, the rebuilding of our institutions and the prosecution of corruption,” he said.

Ramaphosa also highlighted government efforts to combat organised crime, implement the recommendations of the State Capture Commission and strengthen law enforcement agencies through the Madlanga Commission process.

Opposition parties and political formations reacted swiftly, with several insisting the President’s review application should not delay Parliament’s impeachment process.

ActionSA parliamentary chief whip Lerato Ngobeni said the President could not use litigation “as a shield against political accountability”.

ActionSA confirmed it would formally write to National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, demanding that Parliament proceed with establishing the impeachment committee without delay.

“The era of an outright ANC parliamentary majority is over,” Ngobeni said.

“The matter strikes at the heart of public trust in the Presidency and the integrity of constitutional governance.”

The Democratic Alliance (DA) also warned against unnecessary delays.

DA leader Geordin Hill-Lewis said Ramaphosa had the legal right to approach the courts, but stressed the review process must happen urgently.

“Parliament must also now take urgent legal advice on the implications of the President’s incoming review,” Hill-Lewis said.

“This matter must be handled lawfully, transparently and with the constitutional seriousness it deserves.”

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) launched its strongest attack yet on Ramaphosa, accusing him of attempting to evade accountability.

EFF national spokesperson Sinawo Thambo said the President was exhausting “every political and legal mechanism available to avoid facing an impeachment inquiry”.

The party argued Ramaphosa had abandoned an earlier review application in 2022 after the ANC used its parliamentary majority to halt the impeachment process, only to revive it now after the Constitutional Court ruling.

The EFF said it would oppose the review application in court and seek urgent legal clarity on whether the impeachment process can continue while the review is underway.

The party also welcomed Didiza’s decision to proceed with implementing the Constitutional Court judgment but expressed concern over the absence of firm timelines for establishing the impeachment committee.

Smaller parties and civil society-aligned movements also weighed in.

RISE Mzansi said Parliament’s response must demonstrate a commitment to constitutional principles and accountability, while the African Transformation Movement warned against any attempt to politically manage or dilute the impeachment process.

Meanwhile, the Public Protector South Africa clarified that the Constitutional Court judgment had no bearing on the Public Protector’s own report into allegations relating to the Phala Phala matter.

Acting Public Protector spokesperson Ndili Msoki said the Constitutional Court case dealt solely with Parliament’s Section 89 process and did not overturn or assess the Public Protector’s findings.

With Ramaphosa refusing to step aside and Parliament now under pressure to establish an impeachment committee, South Africa appears headed for another major constitutional and political showdown over the future of the Presidency.