South Africa’s apex court has given President Cyril Ramaphosa a bloody nose in his challenge to be granted direct access to it regarding the case of the multimillion-rand theft at his game farm, Phalala Phalala.
On Wednesday, the Constitutional Court denied Ramaphosa direct access to challenge the findings of retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo who found that he had a case to answer over how he handled the break-in at his game farm.
Ngcobo recommended that Ramaphosa face impeachment over the debacle, but the president disputed the findings, and instead filed an application to challenge the Ngcobo report directly with the Constitutional Court.
It came after allegations by former spy boss Arthur Fraser that the president had millions of dollars stored in a couch at the farm and was complicit in a high-level law enforcement “cover-up”.
In his challenge to the court, Ramaphosa argued that only the Constitutional Court could decide whether he had violated his constitutional obligations.
The Constitutional Court, however, unanimously dismissed Ramaphosa’s application, ruling that “no case has been made for exclusive jurisdiction or direct access”.
Here are 5 points you now need to know.
- The Concourt ruling means that if Ramaphosa wants to challenge the Ngcobo report, he will have to do so in the high court.
- Ramaphosa continues to maintain his innocence, arguing that the panel had relied on “hearsay” and speculation in determining the impeachment case against him. He also says that the only real evidence placed before the panel about the Phala Phala theft was given by him, and accused the panel of ignoring his sworn testimony in favour of speculation.
- The Ngcobo report has not only cast a shadow over Ramaphosa’s presidency but also presents a potential threat to his continued leadership. DA leader John Steenhuisen said the dismissal of Ramaphosa’s application by the court confirmed that the details of the report should be investigated by the National Assembly in the form of an ad hoc committee. The EFF is pushing for Ramaphosa to resign.
- Ramaphosa maintains that Ngcobo’s report is unfair and unjustified and maintains that the claims about the “cover-up” and the alleged source of the cash were built on “hearsay”, speculation and evidence that appeared to have been unlawfully obtained.
- Vincent Magwenya, the president’s spokesperson, told the media on Wednesday that the Constitutional Court judgment dealt with, “what (he) would call a procedural matter with respect to the president seeking direct access to the Constitutional Court. The judgment does not pronounce on the merits of the case.” Magwenya said the judgment was “not a blow to the president” and that the president’s legal team would weigh its options.
IOL