Political parties have reacted to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s address on the Constitutional Court judgment in the Phala Phala matter, with the Labour Party of South Africa urging for a structural reset, while other political parties expressed mixed demands for immediate accountability and acknowledgement of Ramaphosa’s right to legal review.

In a televised address on Monday, Ramaphosa declared he will not resign, despite calls to do so following a Constitutional Court ruling.

He stated the ruling regarding his Phala Phala farm scandal does not compel him to resign, promising to take the Independent Panel report on review to stop it from proceeding to an Impeachment Committee.

Ramaphosa announced that his legal team had advised him to take the independent panel report, which he described as "deeply flawed", on judicial review, aiming to stop it from proceeding to a full impeachment committee.

The address followed a Constitutional Court ruling on May 8, which found that the National Assembly acted illegally in 2022 when it voted against adopting a report regarding the Phala Phala farm theft.

On Monday, National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza initiated the process to establish an impeachment committee to investigate Ramaphosa regarding the Phala Phala scandal.

The Labour Party of South Africa has strongly condemned Ramaphosa's actions, calling for a total overhaul of the country's political system.

The party argued that the judgment exposed the "structural weaknesses" of the current system, where the President was protected by party majorities in Parliament.

The Labour Party called for a system where the State President was elected directly by the people, rather than through Parliament, and urged for the removal of reliance on party political structures for accountability.

Labour Party interim president Joseph Mathunjwa stated that the repeated crises, from Jacob Zuma to Ramaphosa, showed that the current parliamentary democracy had failed.

MIXED REACTIONS

The Democratic Alliance (DA) welcomed the ruling, warning that the review must not be used to delay the work of Parliament.

DA leader Geordin Hill-Lewis called on Parliament to handle the matter “lawfully, transparently and with the constitutional seriousness” it deserves, noting that Ramaphosa’s decision to take the Section 89 Panel Report on review must not be used to delay the work of Parliament.

“… this remains an African National Congress- (ANC-) made crisis, rooted in serious unanswered questions about the President’s conduct and the ANC’s long record of shielding its own leaders from accountability,” he said.

Hill-Lewis explained that Ramaphosa should bring any review application with due haste and on an expedited basis, so that the legal position is clarified quickly and this matter is not delayed unnecessarily.

He urged Parliament to take urgent legal advice on the implications of the President’s incoming review, including whether it affects the establishment and work of the Impeachment Committee, or whether the committee may proceed while the review is underway.

“Given the serious constitutional consequences of this matter, and the massive public interest in it, Parliament must take the South African people into its confidence by sharing that legal advice once it receives it,” he said.

ActionSA Parliamentary Chief Whip Lerato Ngobeni said while every person had the right to approach the courts, Ramaphosa cannot use litigation as a shield against political accountability.

She explained that South Africans deserved full transparency and accountability regarding the millions of rand concealed at Phala Phala, the burglary itself, and the conduct that followed thereafter.

ActionSA will therefore formally write to the Speaker of the National Assembly calling on Parliament to proceed without delay in implementing the Constitutional Court ruling and constituting the Section 89 impeachment committee.

“The era of an outright ANC parliamentary majority is over. Parties in the Government of National Unity must now decide whether they serve the people of South Africa and the Constitution, or whether they are more concerned with preserving the comforts and perks associated with Cabinet positions,” Ngobeni noted.

Impeachment brings with it the dissolving of Cabinet.

She pointed out that no political arrangement could supersede Parliament’s constitutional duty to hold the executive accountable.

Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) national spokesperson Mkhuleko Hlengwa said while his party respected the right of every individual to approach the courts, as guaranteed by the Constitution, no one is above the law.

He pointed out that Ramaphosa’s legal challenge did not suspend Parliament’s constitutional responsibilities.

“Parliament remains duty-bound to implement the judgment of the Constitutional Court and to establish the processes and structures required under Section 89 of the Constitution, including the impeachment committee,” he said.

The party wants the parliamentary process, particularly the amendment and regularisation of Parliament’s rules to ensure compliance with the Constitutional Court judgment, to proceed in parallel with the President’s review application.

“The impeachment process is an institutional responsibility of Parliament and cannot be delayed by legal proceedings where applicable,” he said.

The IFP maintained that both the judicial and certain aspects of parliamentary processes must proceed simultaneously in a manner that upholds constitutionalism, institutional integrity, accountability, and the rule of law.

Meanwhile, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) expressed concerns that the steps outlined by Didiza did not contain clear dates and binding timeframes, calling on her to convene an urgent sitting of the National Assembly Programming Committee specifically to process this matter before Parliament becomes consumed by Budget Vote debates and related business.

The party highlighted that this lack of timeframes, raised serious suspicion and bordered on a potentially malicious attempt by the ANC to once again use the position of Speaker, and Parliamentary procedures, to shield Ramaphosa.

The EFF noted that the Independent Panel report must be formally referred to the Impeachment Committee before the end of this week, and the Impeachment Committee itself must be constituted before the end of the week.

“… should there be any indication of delay tactics or bad faith conduct, the EFF will approach the courts on an urgent basis for appropriate relief,” the party warned.