Step aside Ramaphosa after Phala Phala judgment

Political parties, civil society organisations, and the labour movement have responded swiftly to the Constitutional Court's landmark ruling ordering that the Section 89 Phala Phala report must return to Parliament's impeachment committee.

While opposition parties overwhelmingly celebrated the judgment as a victory for accountability, the Presidency accepted the ruling with composure, Parliament promised to study it carefully, and COSATU urged cool heads and due process.

One voice, however, went further than all others, calling for President Cyril Ramaphosa to step aside immediately.

The first response from the Union Buildings was careful and brief. The Presidency acknowledged the ruling without contestation, with spokesperson Vincent Magwenya issuing a statement that was notably conciliatory in tone.

"President Cyril Ramaphosa respects the Constitutional Court's judgment and reaffirms his commitment to the Constitution, the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law," the statement read.

"President Ramaphosa has been consistent in providing his full assistance to the various enquiries into this matter. President Ramaphosa maintains that no person is above the law and that any allegations should be subjected to due process without fear, favour or prejudice. The President calls on all South Africans to respect the Constitutional Court judgment and all judicial institutions."

Parliament's response was equally measured. Spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said in a brief statement: "Parliament notes and respects the judgment of the Constitutional Court in the matter brought by the Economic Freedom Fighters challenging the Sixth Parliament's handling of the Section 89 Independent Panel Report relating to President Cyril Ramaphosa. Parliament will carefully study and consider the Court's judgment and its implications for the procedures of the National Assembly."

ActionSA National Chairperson Michael Beaumont framed the ruling in explicitly political terms, pointing to the changed composition of Parliament since the ANC's loss of its outright majority in the 2024 elections.

"ActionSA celebrates the ruling of the Constitutional Court handed down today as a victory for the South African people. This ruling has determined that the rule used by the National Assembly to deny the investigation report into Phala Phala being referred to the Impeachment Committee was invalid and thus the vote must be deemed invalid. The fact that this report must now return to a Parliament where the ANC no longer enjoys a majority that can protect the President over the Constitution is a victory for accountability," Beaumont said.

Beaumont reserved particular pressure for the parties that joined the Government of National Unity after the 2024 elections but had since gone quiet on the Phala Phala matter. "Now is the time for parties in the GNU, who have gone silent on Phala Phala since they have entered government, to demonstrate whether they will act for South Africans for themselves," he said.

RISE Mzansi National leader Songezo Zibi MP placed the ruling in its historical context, noting that Friday marked the 30th anniversary of the adoption of South Africa's Constitution and that the court's message went far beyond the Phala Phala matter itself.

"This judgment sends a definitive signal to every Member of Parliament and all political parties," Zibi said.

"In a constitutional democracy, a parliamentary majority cannot be used as a blunt instrument to subvert the law or bypass accountability. Majoritarianism does not and must never supersede the rule of law."

Zibi was direct about the damage Parliament had done to its own credibility in 2022. "Parliament is the voice of the people and the primary watchdog over the Executive. Its credibility was severely damaged when it voted to ignore the Section 89 Independent Panel's report."

He called on the National Assembly to move swiftly on three fronts: to immediately implement the Court's order and re-examine the Phala Phala evidence; to initiate the necessary formal inquiry to ensure the allegations are tested fairly and transparently; and to restore public trust in the legislature as an independent arm of the state.

"Parliament now has a second chance to do the right thing and remove that shadow through a transparent, well-structured process," Zibi said. "It must not squander it."

The African Transformation Movement, which was also a party to the case before the Constitutional Court, issued one of the most measured yet pointed statements of the day. ATM National Spokesperson Zama Ntshona said the ruling had restored what Parliament should never have abandoned.

"The Court has now made it plain that Parliament may not use procedure to shield power from constitutional scrutiny," Ntshona said.

"By declaring Rule 129(i)(b) inconsistent with the Constitution, setting aside the National Assembly vote of 13 December 2022, and directing that the independent panel's report be referred to an impeachment committee, the Court has restored the accountability process required by our constitutional order."

The ATM was emphatic that the ruling carried no predetermined conclusion about the President's guilt. "This judgment is not a finding of guilt against President Cyril Ramaphosa; it is a reaffirmation that no President, no party majority, and no institution stands above the Constitution."

But the organisation drew a sharp line between legal process and political responsibility. "South Africans who endure poverty, unemployment, crime, and collapsing services deserve a state that acts with honesty and transparency, not one that appears to reserve accountability for the weak while protecting the powerful."

The ATM called for the impeachment committee to be convened without delay and for the President to cooperate fully.

"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."

The Azanian People's Organisation took perhaps the sharpest tone of any established political party, declaring the ruling inevitable and framing the previous parliamentary decision as a constitutional betrayal.

"AZAPO maintains that the apex court could not have ruled otherwise," said AZAPO Secretary for Publicity and Information Nosipiwo Manona.

"The previous attempt to bury the independent panel's findings, which pointed to a prima facie case of serious misconduct, was a betrayal of the National Assembly's constitutional mandate to hold the President accountable."

AZAPO invoked the broader social context of the ruling. "The 'Farmgate' saga, involving hidden foreign currency and alleged cover-ups, strikes at the heart of the moral crisis facing our nation. The black majority, who continue to languish in poverty and landlessness, deserve a leadership that is beyond reproach and a Parliament that serves the people rather than partisan interests."

The organisation also issued a caution about over-reliance on the courts. "While we welcome this judicial intervention, AZAPO reminds the people of Azania that the Judiciary alone cannot save our democracy. We call upon all conscious citizens to remain vigilant and demand that Parliament now discharges its duties without fear, favour, or prejudice. The time for 'easy ways out' is over; the time for decisive accountability is now."

The Afrika Mayibuye Movement went further than any other organisation, issuing a seven-point demand that included an explicit call for the President to be suspended from office while the process unfolds.

"There has to be urgent action because President Ramaphosa may have seriously violated the Constitution, breached his oath of office and contravened the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act," the movement said in its statement.

Among its seven demands, Afrika Mayibuye called for Parliament to immediately reconvene and adopt the Section 89 panel report in full without further obstruction or delay; for the Speaker to constitute an impeachment committee to conduct a thorough and transparent inquiry; and critically, for "President Ramaphosa to step aside and be suspended from office pending the completion of the process to ensure no interference with proceedings."

The movement also demanded that "all relevant witnesses, including the President, must be summoned to testify under oath during public hearings that leave no room for evasion or secrecy," and that "state organs that colluded to protect the President, including the Public Protector and law enforcement agencies must be probed for their role in the cover-up to dismantle networks of impunity."

In the most cautious response of the day, the Congress of South African Trade Unions acknowledged the ruling while urging restraint and warning against political grandstanding.

"The Federation respects the constitutional role of the judiciary and in particular, its mandate to hold the executive accountable without fear or favour," COSATU said in a statement issued by Parliamentary Coordinator Matthew Parks.

"We appreciate the manner in which President Cyril Ramaphosa has sought to affirm the independence of the judiciary at all times and to subject himself to its full scrutiny as the Head of State."

COSATU called on MPs to approach the matter with gravity rather than theatre.

"We await Parliament's consideration of this weighty issue and urge Members of Parliament to approach this serious matter for workers and the nation, with the necessary sobriety. These are times of immense global and domestic instability, which pose real threats to the nation. They require cool and calm heads and less twerking for social media likes or sound bites for television cameras, let alone rash or emotional actions."

The federation also invoked the Bill of Rights. "It is equally critical that the Bill of Rights' assurance of the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty be upheld for all citizens, including a Head of State."

With the ruling now in force, Parliament is required to refer the Section 89 independent panel report to its impeachment committee and begin the process afresh. The panel, chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, had found in November 2022 that there was prima facie evidence that Ramaphosa abused his office, violated anti-corruption laws by failing to properly declare foreign currency, and authorised a secretive operation outside the bounds of the law.

The political landscape is dramatically different from December 2022, when an ANC majority voted to block the report's adoption. The ANC fell below 50% of the vote in the 2024 general elections for the first time since 1994, and the GNU arrangement that followed means any impeachment committee proceedings will play out before a far more contested Parliament.

As Songezo Zibi put it: "The principle is simple: no one is above the law. The Phala Phala matter has cast a long shadow over our accountability system. Parliament now has a second chance to do the right thing."