Opposition parties in parliament have challenged parties in the government of national unity GNU) to choose South Africa over the perks they have gained since joining the Cabinet.
This follows the Constitutional Court’s critical judgment on the impeachment process that President Cyril Ramaphosa has been trying to avoid for years.
On Friday, the Constitutional Court ruled that parliament acted unconstitutionally and irrationally by voting against adopting the Section 89 independent panel report into the alleged robbery at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm in 2020.
The court set aside parliament’s vote, which shielded the president from impeachment proceedings.
Speaking outside court, EFF leader Julius Malema said now that the ANC has lost its majority in parliament and now relies on support from other parties, parliamentarians must use their conscience to hold the president to account.
“People used their majority to become unreasonable, and that is why we are saying every decision must meet the rationality test.
“The independent panel had told them that there is prima facie evidence here, and they used their majority to suppress corruption. They must be ashamed of themselves.
“Let’s see the hand of the DA; they were with us when we were saying let’s impeach. Now that they are eating apples and bananas, let’s see if they will be able to talk with a full mouth,” he said.
ActionSA national chairperson Michael Beaumont told the media outside court that several government institutions have bent over backwards to shield Ramaphosa from accountability. He said parliament had also done the same.
“We look forward to this issue returning to parliament, and where the ANC no longer enjoys the majority, thanks to the South African people, and they will no longer be able to protect the president at all costs. We are going to work with other opposition parties to ensure that we hold them accountable, and we appeal to those parties in the GNU to find their principles again, which they used to have before going into government.
“The GNU is 70% of the South African parliament, so if the GNU is going to choose the blue lights and the perks of government over the constitution, it will be very clear that this process will not see any accountability,” he said.
Constitutional obligations
Build One South Africa, Mmusi Maimane’s party, said the court’s ruling sends a clear message that constitutional obligations cannot be sidestepped for political convenience, and that parliament cannot abandon its duty to hold the executive accountable.
“The Phala Phala matter raised serious allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa. Rather than allowing due constitutional processes to unfold, the majority in Parliament shielded the president from scrutiny by improperly rejecting the independent panel report,” the party said in a statement.
When will the parliamentary processes be re-established?
ATM spokesperson Zama Ntshona, in a media statement on Friday, called for the immediate establishment of the impeachment committee by parliament.
“We therefore call for the impeachment committee to be convened without delay, for its work to be conducted openly and lawfully, and for the president to cooperate fully with every constitutional and investigative process.
“This moment will define whether parliament remains a guardian of constitutional democracy or becomes an instrument for shielding executive misconduct.
“South Africans are watching, and history will remember those who chose principle over convenience, and those who failed the nation when accountability was most required,” said Ntshona.
What will the DA do?
Meanwhile, the DA’s newly minted leader, Geordin Hill-Lewis, said his party notes the judgment. The DA is the second-largest party in the GNU, holding several key positions in the Cabinet.
“This judgment has implications beyond any one president. It will shape how parliament holds all future presidents accountable. That is why the DA will approach this process with the seriousness, discipline and constitutional responsibility it demands.
“This judgment also draws a clear line between the DA and the ANC. For too long, the ANC has presided over a political culture in which accountability is delayed, diluted or avoided when it becomes inconvenient.
“The DA stands for a different kind of politics in which the constitution comes before party loyalty, and no leader is shielded from answering to the people. The DA’s position remains consistent, that accountability, constitutionalism and the rule of law must always prevail,” he said.
Meanwhile, the ANC’s spokesperson, Mahlengi Bhengu, said her party is studying the judgment.
