Did Ramaphosa mislead Parly? ConCourt to deliver judgment in CR17 matter
The legal battle centres on a half a million-rand donation to Cyril Ramaphosa's campaign to become ANC president and the public protectors finding that as President of South Africa, Ramaphosa had misled Parliament about that donation.
DURBAN - The Constitutional Court is expected to hand down its judgment on Thursday on the case involving Cyril Ramaphosa's campaign for the ANC presidency.
Known as CR17, the campaign landed Ramaphosa in hot water with the Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane, who found he had misled Parliament about campaign donations.
Ramaphosa challenged Mkhwebane's report and won. She then took her cause to the Constitutional Court.
The legal battle centres on a half a million-rand donation to Ramaphosa's campaign to become ANC president and the Mkhwebane's finding that as President of South Africa, Ramaphosa had misled Parliament about that donation.
But Mkhwebane's report went further than that, delving into all donations to the campaign totalling well over R200 million according to her.
The Public Protector was scathing, saying there was merit to the suspicion that money laundering was involved and recommending remedial action.
Ramaphosa took the decision on review and the Pretoria High Court found in his favour, setting it aside in an equally scathing judgment that called it “inexplicable,” “reckless” and “without basis in fact or law”.
The court also found she didn't have the jurisdiction to investigate the campaign funding.
Mkhwebane then approached the Constitutional Court, which is expected to rule on Thursday on whether the president did mislead Parliament and whether the Public Protector's investigation into the CR17 campaign was within her scope.