South African parliamentary impeachment committee to oppose EFF and lawyers’ lawsuits against Ramaphosa
South Africa’s parliamentary committee considering the impeachment of President Cyril Ramaphosa on September 9 supported a decision to oppose an urgent application by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party and a similar application by the African Association of Legal Practitioners. According to Daily Maverick, 19 committee members supported the decision, while nine voted against it.
Dispute over evidence
Through its chair, the committee will oppose the EFF’s application to the Western Cape High Court. Both applications demand that the decision to revoke the appointment of advocate Thandazani Madonsela as evidence leader be set aside, and that no other candidate be appointed to the position until the court proceedings are completed.
EFF MP Omphile Maotwe stated that the committee initially recommended Madonsela but later reversed that decision without any new facts emerging, following objections from the executive branch. In her view, this jeopardizes Parliament’s authority to make decisions.
Vuyolwethu Zungula, a representative of the African Transformation Movement, also criticized the majority’s decision and said that parties in the governing coalition were protecting a person who should be the subject of an investigation. ActionSA MP Athol Trollip supported concerns about the dominance of the coalition majority.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Position of coalition parties
Democratic Alliance parliamentary leader George Michalakis said that granting the applications could seriously affect the powers of Parliament and its committees, as the rules allow committees to change their own decisions. Freedom Front Plus representative Wouter Wessels stressed that no rule prohibits committees from reconsidering adopted decisions.
The African National Congress and the Patriotic Alliance stated that the committee had acted rationally and fairly. After the vote, discussion of a new candidate for the position of evidence leader was effectively halted. Committee chair Makashule Gana said he would not put the matter to a vote, as a consensus had formed to postpone the final decision until the court process is completed.
The impeachment procedure is linked to the Phala Phala case, which concerns $580,000 stolen from sofa cushions at the president’s farm. A court decision on Ramaphosa’s application concerning the finding of the Section 89 panel, which concluded that the president has a case to answer in the Phala Phala matter, is still pending. A court ban on holding public parliamentary hearings on the impeachment also remains in force.
