Ahead of South Africa’s critical 4 November 2026 local government elections, with no clear successor and not wanting to give his detractors the victory of being responsible for ending his presidency, President Cyril Ramaphosa, rather than resigning or facing an impeachment inquiry, has decided to go for the “Stalingrad” legal option of challenging or stalling a parliamentary probe.
The Constitutional Court on Friday 8 May ruled that Parliament’s 13 December 2022 vote to block an impeachment inquiry against Ramaphosa was unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court did make a judgment on the substance of the allegations against Ramaphosa.
“It is declared that the vote of the National Assembly taken on 13 December 2022 … is inconsistent with the Constitution, invalid and it is set aside,” said Chief Justice Mandisa Maya.
The Constitutional Court looked at whether Parliament acted within the Constitution in dismissing the recommendation from an independent panel appointed by Parliament and led by the former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, to proceed with an impeachment inquiry into allegations that Ramaphosa broke the law in his handling of the theft of foreign currency at his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo.
Ramaphosa is planning to apply for a judicial review of Parliament’s Section 89 panel report. Ramaphosa did not choose to do a judicial review of the panel’s report three years ago, after the ANC used its then majority to vote against the recommendations of the panel’s report during the National Assembly vote that the Constitutional Court now said was unconstitutional and irrational.
A judicial review could push the impeachment inquiry until after the 4 November 2026 local government elections and even to beyond the ANC’s December 2027 national elective conference where the party will elect a new party president. In such a scenario, Ramaphosa would then resign as South African president, following the ANC’s December 2027 elective conference and the new ANC leader would be presented to parliament to be elected South African president.
Ramaphosa cannot stand for re-election as party president at the ANC’s December 2027 conference. Of course, Ramaphosa’s gamble on a judicial review could be successful and the panel’s findings may be overturned in a judicial review.
The ANC had then, when it was still the majority party, once again used its parliamentary majority to close ranks behind its president and party interest, rather than adhering to the Constitution and making decisions in the interest of South Africa.
The ANC has regularly used its parliamentary majority to block its leaders and ANC-connected public servants and state-owned entity executives from being held accountable for wrongdoing or to force policies through which are unconstitutional, irrational and based on the ANC party interests, rather than South Africa’s national interests. This has undermined the credibility of Parliament, the Constitution and democracy.
And last week, the Constitutional Court again had to hold Parliament accountable for not playing its oversight role.
The Phala Phala scandal erupted in 2022, when former chief spy Arthur Fraser laid charges against Ramaphosa, alleging that he tried to cover up the theft of at least $4 million from Phala Phala. It later emerged that about $580,000 was stolen which the president said was from the sale of buffalo. Ramaphosa denied wrongdoing, but the independent panel found evidence that he may have committed misconduct.
The Constitutional Court legal challenge was initiated by the opposition Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM), who argued that the ANC’s use of its majority to have Parliament reject the independent panel’s findings for Parliament to initiate an impeachment hearing was irrational and unconstitutional.
The EFF and its leader Julius Malema have made nailing Ramaphosa an important plank of its electoral campaign strategy. If Ramaphosa resigns or is impeached, it would be seen by black voters disillusioned by the ANC as a victory for the EFF and Malema and it could re-energise the EFF’s vote in the local government elections and in the 2029 national and provincial elections.
Ramaphosa is the glue that holds the current fractured ANC together and many ANC leaders and supporters may want him not to resign, to face an impeachment inquiry and for the party to use its 39.7% majority to block an impeachment.
The Constitution requires that two-thirds of the 400 MPs must support the motion.
Ramaphosa and the ANC’s problem is that there appear no immediate strong successors to take over the leadership of the ANC if Ramaphosa goes.
The leading potential Ramaphosa successors are Paul Mashatile, Fikile Mbalula and Panyaza Lesufi. Unlike in 2022, when the ANC used its parliamentary majority to block the vote to establish an impeachment inquiry, the ANC will now need the support of key members of the Government of National Unity or if not, of the opposition EFF and uMkhonto weSizwe parties to elect an ANC successor to Ramaphosa, if he resigns or is impeached.
Some non-ANC GNU partners, such as the DA, are implacably opposed to having Mashatile or Lesufi succeeding Ramaphosa as ANC president and are also opposed, even if to a lesser extent, to Mbalula’s candidacy.
This means that the ANC may have to approach the EFF and MK for support for a Mashatile, Lesufi or Mbalula presidential candidacy. It is very likely that the EFF and MK would extract the ultimate prize for their support, which is replacing the DA, Freedom Front Plus and the Inkatha Freedom Party in the GNU and forming an ANC-EFF-MK national coalition.
In the event that Ramaphosa’s reputation survives a public impeachment inquiry reasonably intact, it is not clear that he would get overwhelming support from the ANC’s divided caucus.
If the parliamentary impeachment vote is a secret one, supporters of Mashatile, Lesufi or Mbalula’s presidential bids may see an opportunity to vote with the opposition against Ramaphosa, to open up the presidential office for their preferred candidates.
The South African Communist Party will contest this year’s local government elections independently from the ANC. The ANC in March told SACP leaders in Cabinet, Parliament and government – who are there by virtue of the SACP’s alliance with ANC, to choose between the ANC and the SACP. A number of SACP leaders are ANC MPs.
The SACP and Cosatu have been critical of the ANC’s GNU with the Democratic Alliance, the IFP and the FFP. They preferred an ANC coalition with ANC breakaway parties, the EFF and the MK. They blame Ramaphosa for the current GNU composition, which excludes the EFF and MK. Some ANC MPs that are members of the SACP in a vote to impeach Ramaphosa may vote with those who want to impeach Ramaphosa, particularly if the vote is secret.
Even if the ANC would use its majority to block an impeachment inquiry result which calls for impeachment, an impeachment inquiry is a public process and could unleash more, potentially damaging allegations against the president.
In an impeachment inquiry Ramaphosa will be required to take the stand and be interrogated by hostile MPs. The EFF, MK, ATM and ActionSA would relish the chance to question Ramaphosa in public. Throughout his presidency, Ramaphosa has been unenthusiastic about taking questions from journalists.
Witnesses are obliged to appear before an impeachment inquiry. In such an inquiry new revelations may surface, which could scandalise Ramaphosa more and could open the prospect, if new revelations are damaging, it may even spur potential criminal prosecution, even if the ANC would use said majority to block the impeachment.
Institutions, such as the South African Reserve Bank and the South African Revenue Service will also be in the dock in an impeachment inquiry for their action or non-action in the Phala Phala scandal.
The EFF, MK, ATM and ActionSA are likely going to fight the efforts by Ramaphosa to pursue the judicial review long-route. The EFF has already stated it will call for a motion of no-confidence in the president.
Ramaphosa’s decision to pursue a judicial review and the Constitutional Court’s call for Parliament to start an impeachment inquiry, will create tensions in the GNU.
Parties such as the DA, IFP, FF Plus and Rise Mzansi will be under pressure to show their colours, in the context of an EFF, ATM and MK that will position themselves as fighting to protect the ideals of the Constitution, accountability and Parliament’s independence in their battle to have Parliament implement the Constitutional Court’s recommendations for an impeachment inquiry to be launched.
Gwede Mantashe told the SABC in 2022 Ramaphosa wanted to resign when the panel released their report and recommendations for an impeachment inquiry.
However, as the ANC’s election talisman, ANC veterans, including Mantashe, persuaded Ramaphosa not to do so, fearing that without Ramaphosa, the party’s biggest vote-catcher, the ANC would suffer cataclysmically in the 2024 elections. Ramaphosa, against his instincts, was persuaded not to resign. He may regret that decision.
Both an impeachment inquiry and the judicial review could further damage the credibility and authority of Ramaphosa and make him fully a lame-duck president.
The combination of Constitutional Court judgment to force Parliament to institute an impeachment inquiry, Ramaphosa opposition to do so, by seeking a judicial review and the opposition’s likely agitation for the swift establishment of an impeachment inquiry and their opposition to Ramaphosa’s effort to review the panel’s report, could further damage the ANC’s position among many of its already disillusioned supporters.
It may lead to a further slide in the party’s vote in the local government elections and in the 2029 general elections.
William Gumede is an associate professor at the School of Governance at the University of the Witwatersrand and the author of the bestselling Restless Nation: Making Sense of Troubled Times (Tafelberg).
This is an edited extract from his recent talk on “Art, Ideas and Johannesburg’s Future”, Saturday evening at IBI Art Gallery, Craighall, Johannesburg.
Ramaphosa’s decision to pursue a judicial review and the Constitutional Court’s call for Parliament to start an impeachment inquiry, will create tensions in the GNU
