Chief Justice Mandisa Maya reserved judgment on the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) Phala Phala challenge. For illustrative purpposes. Picture: The Citizen/ Nigel Sibanda
After a day of intense arguments in the Constitutional Court on Tuesday, Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema expressed confidence that the party will succeed in its bid to reinstate impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Chief Justice Mandisa Maya reserved judgment on the EFF Phala Phala challenge.
The EFF’s legal team on Tuesday argued that Parliament mishandled the Phala Phala matter, involving the 2020 theft of millions of dollars from Ramaphosa’s Limpopo farm.
Advocate Kameel Premhid described it as “problematic” for a sitting president to have millions of dollars hidden in couches at his farm.
He argued that the Phala Phala matter is akin to former president Jacob Zuma’s upgrades at Nkandla.
Premhid said the independent panel that considered the evidence against Ramaphosa acted as a “sifting mechanism”, and played that role as an extension of the National Assembly.
ALSO READ: Phala Phala matter akin to ‘Zuma’s Nkandla upgrades’ – EFF argues [VIDEO]
However, Peter Harris, Ramaphosa’s lawyer, argued that the independent panel should have assessed whether there was enough evidence to warrant an impeachment investigation rather than only looking for prima facie evidence.
“The independent panel must, in other words, determine whether there is sufficient evidence, not merely that the president committed misconduct, but that he did so deliberately and in bad faith.
“There cannot be sufficient evidence that the president has been guilty of misconduct as defined unless there is also sufficient evidence that he acted deliberately and in bad faith,” Harris Argued.
Harris said there is “no evidence that Ramaphosa acted in bad faith in any way”.
Earlier, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, representing African National Congress (ANC), argued the red berets could not provide proof that ANC MPs were forced to vote against the impeachment.
Ngcukaitobi argued that the EFF did not have details of internal meetings and discussions of the ANC. The EFF, however, continued to argue that the members abused their power of position to shield Ramaphosa from possible impeachment.
Ngcukaitobi said the ANC obtained legal advice on the independent panel’s report.
“The resolution of the ANC members was not a knee-jerk reaction to blindly protect the president,” the ANC states in court papers.
“It was a carefully considered position bearing in mind the weight of the constitutional obligation to hold the president accountable and the requirement to do so in a manner authorised by the Constitution,” Ngcukaitobi said.
ALSO READ: ANC MPs were not threatened to vote against Section 89 panel Phala Phala report – Ngcukaitobi
African Transformation Movement (ATM) Advocate Anton Katz argued that he was “astounded that $500 000 was found in the couch”, and “there needs to be an explanation for why it was found in the couch.”
“Why were the dollars in the couch?” he asked, which prompted Justice Rammaka Mathopo to say: “But he [Ramaphosa wouldn’t know why the dollars are in the couch.”
Justice Mathopo said Ramaphosa was given an after-the-fact explanation for the location of the money, which was explained by one of his staff members.
“You and me would be astounded to say: why are you keeping the dollars in the couch? But they were there and they were stolen there as we are told”.
Katz agreed: “I agree with you Justice Mathopo, I would be astounded. I am astounded.”
The ATM advocate focused on the respondents’ arguments. He said they were presented as if the decision made in December 2022 was an impeachment decision.
“But it was a decision on whether there should be a trial,” he said.
With judgment reserved, Malema assured thousands of EFF supporters outside court that Ramaphosa would be held accountable.
“We are going to win this case against Ramaphosa and we will call him back in Parliament and start an impeachment process.”
The EFF and ATM claim the National Assembly’s rejection of the Section 89 panel report regarding the Phala Phala matter in 2022 and not referring it to an impeachment committee was irrational and unlawful.
The report, compiled by an independent panel led by retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo was tasked with investigating allegations against President Cyril Ramaphosa after a large sum in foreign currency was stolen from his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo.
The report found that there was a prima facie case for which the President had to answer.
ALSO READ: EFF turns to ConCourt to challenge parliament’s rejection of Phala Phala report
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
