ANC says it can't allow Ramaphosa to be subjected to impeachment inquiry on whim
The party has also vehemently denied that members of Parliament were threatened with their jobs if they did not reject the independent panel report put before the National Assembly in 2022.
FILE: President Cyril Ramaphosa engaging with members of the media following his Oral Reply to questions to the nation on various national developments during the hybrid sitting of the National Council of Provinces held at the National Council of Provinces in Cape Town on 12 September 2024. Picture: GCIS
CAPE TOWN - The African National Congress (ANC) said it could not allow President Cyril Ramaphosa to be subjected to an impeachment inquiry on a whim, nor as a fishing expedition, over events that unfolded on his Phala Phala farm in 2020.
It has also vehemently denied that members of Parliament (MPs) were threatened with their jobs if they did not reject the independent panel report put before the National Assembly in 2022.
ALSO READ:
- Malema confident EFF will succeed in reinstating Ramaphosa impeachment proceedings
- ANC grilled on why Ramaphosa didn't bank the money stolen from his Phala Phala farm
- Ramaphosa must have his day in court if there's evidence he may have transgressed law - ATM
The report concluded that Ramaphosa had a prima facie case to answer in law and his oath of office over thousands of United States (US) Dollars that were kept in a sofa at his farmhouse.
In an all-day hearing before the Constitutional Court, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM) on Tuesday challenged the National Assembly’s decision to dismiss the findings as irrational, seeking to have the decision overturned.
The EFF has come under stern criticism from the apex court for the time that elapsed before filing this case.
However, the party argues that the merits of the case and the public interest should outweigh the delay.
The president claimed the party only filed the case 14 months after the fact as an election tactic.
The ANC’s legal representative, Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, said taking a president away from running the country to face an impeachment inquiry had to be carefully considered.
“One, we need some comfort [of] the source, reliability, and credibility of the information in front of us, and two, we also need to make sure the panel has acted lawfully and constitutionally.”
Ngcukaitobi told the court that the ANC believes the panel relied heavily on single-sourced information from former spy boss Arthur Fraser, which was not backed up by any other witnesses.
He also cast doubt on statements and documents purportedly extracted from reports by the Namibian police, after the president’s VIP protection unit set off on a cross-border chase to retrieve the stolen money.
But EFF lawyer, Advocate Kameel Premhid, argued that irrespective of a debate over whether an evidence threshold had been met, the findings of the Section 89 panel could not be ignored.
“It reaches the conclusion it does, fully cognisant of the limitations on it, but nonetheless reaches the conclusion that there’s a case to answer.”
Judgment in the matter has been reserved.