Constitutional Court Blocks Ramaphosa Impeachment Case; Inquiry Hearings Remain Frozen

JOHANNESBURG - A legal standoff over South Africa’s impeachment inquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa has reached a critical juncture, with the Constitutional Court on Wednesday declining to hear an appeal that sought to unfreeze the inquiry’s public hearings. The court determined that stepping in now would serve no purpose, given that a lower court is set to rule on the matter imminently.

The Constitutional Court’s reasoning was procedural and precise. “The court has concluded that it is not in the interests of justice to hear the matter at this stage, given the imminent determination of the review in the Western Cape Division of the High Court, the outcome of which will render the interim interdict moot,” the court stated. The Western Cape High Court is scheduled to hear Ramaphosa’s legal challenge to an independent panel report from September 2 to 4, a hearing that could resolve the underlying dispute entirely and eliminate any need for the Constitutional Court to act.

The inquiry has been frozen since July 24, when the Western Cape High Court granted an interim interdict preventing Parliament’s impeachment committee from conducting public hearings until Ramaphosa’s legal challenge proceeds. Multiple political parties and the impeachment committee itself had appealed to the Constitutional Court to overturn that order, hoping to resume the inquiry without waiting for the lower court proceedings to conclude.

Makashule Gana, chairperson of the impeachment committee, responded to Wednesday’s decision by confirming the committee would comply with the Western Cape High Court’s judgment and await the outcome of Ramaphosa’s review application.

The dispute traces to allegations involving Ramaphosa’s private game farm in Limpopo Province. In 2020, approximately $580,000 was allegedly stolen from the property, raising questions about whether the funds had been properly reported to authorities. An independent panel chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo examined the matter and concluded in its 2022 report that there was prima facie evidence Ramaphosa may have committed serious misconduct in relation to the incident.

Parliament’s response to that report created the legal tangle now before the courts. The National Assembly voted against adopting the panel’s findings and declined to pursue impeachment proceedings at that time. What changed the trajectory was a Constitutional Court ruling in May, which found that Parliament had acted unlawfully in rejecting the report. That ruling effectively revived the impeachment process and triggered the current legal disputes over how and when the inquiry should proceed.

The September hearing in the Western Cape High Court will determine whether Ramaphosa’s challenge to the independent panel report succeeds. Its outcome will likely decide whether the interim interdict remains necessary and whether the impeachment committee can resume its work. Until then, the inquiry stays suspended, and the nation’s highest court has chosen to let the lower court process run its course before considering any further intervention.