South Africa Court Orders Parliament to Reconsider Ramaphosa Impeachment Case

South Africa’s Constitutional Court has ordered Parliament to reconsider impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala farm scandal involving about $580,000 allegedly stolen from his property in 2020. The court ruled that Parliament’s earlier decision to reject a panel’s recommendation for an impeachment inquiry was unconstitutional, but it did not rule on whether the allegations against him are true. Ramaphosa denies wrongdoing and has not been charged, though the ruling revives political pressure and forces Parliament to review the matter again.

South Africa’s Constitutional Court has ordered Parliament to reconsider whether President Cyril Ramaphosa should face impeachment proceedings following allegations linked to the Phala Phala farm scandal. The case centers on claims that about $580,000 in US dollars was stolen in 2020 from a couch at Ramaphosa’s private game farm in Limpopo province. The money was reportedly connected to the sale of buffalo to a Sudanese businessman, according to the president, who has consistently denied any wrongdoing.
The court did not make a judgment on whether the president was guilty or not. Instead, it focused on the legality of Parliament’s earlier decision to reject the findings of an independent panel set up to investigate the matter. That panel had concluded that Ramaphosa had a case to answer and recommended that an impeachment inquiry should proceed. However, in December 2022, the National Assembly voted against moving forward with the recommendation, a decision the court has now ruled was inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore invalid.
The legal challenge was brought by opposition parties, including the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM). They argued that Parliament failed to act properly and ignored the findings of the panel without proper justification. The court agreed that the parliamentary vote to dismiss the report did not meet constitutional requirements, and it set the decision aside, ordering that the matter be referred back for proper consideration through an impeachment committee process.
Although Ramaphosa has not been charged with any crime, the case has remained a major political issue in South Africa since it first came to public attention in 2022 after allegations were made by former intelligence chief Arthur Fraser. The president has faced persistent criticism over the handling of the incident, even though separate investigations by the Reserve Bank and the Public Protector cleared him of wrongdoing.
The ruling represents a political setback for Ramaphosa, as it revives pressure on Parliament to revisit the impeachment question at a time when his African National Congress (ANC) no longer holds an outright majority. The ANC had previously used its dominance in Parliament to block further action on the panel’s recommendation. However, with the formation of a coalition government, the political dynamics have changed, making future parliamentary decisions less predictable.
Reactions have been divided. Opposition parties have welcomed the ruling as a victory for accountability and constitutional rule, while supporters of the president argue that he has already been cleared by multiple investigations and that the matter is being politically driven. The Democratic Alliance (DA), a key coalition partner, has indicated that it will support constitutional procedures and not shield any leader from scrutiny, further highlighting divisions within the political landscape.
The Constitutional Court’s decision now requires Parliament to properly reconsider the panel’s findings and decide whether an impeachment inquiry should proceed in line with constitutional procedures.