Malema insists, 'You can't prepare for impeachment and stay in office' – Urges Ramaphosa to resign after court decision

Soon after the Constitutional Court (CC) ruling on the Phala Phala scandal on Friday morning, EFF leader Julius Malema called on President Cyril Ramaphosa to resign immediately to prepare for his impeachment proceedings.

Delivering the judgment on a case jointly brought by EFF and African Transformation Movement (ATM), Chief Justice Mandisa Maya ruled that Parliament should form an impeachment committee to determine whether Ramaphosa was still fit to hold office. 

The judgment set aside the National Assembly’s (NA) December 2022 vote to reject the Section 89 Independent Panel, which found prima facie evidence against Ramaphosa for having US$580,000 in his farmhouse without declaring it to the taxman and also failing to report a break-in and theft of the money to the relevant authorities. 

After the judgment was delivered, an excited Malema spoke to the media before addressing a large group of EFF supporters outside the apex court building in Braamfontein, Johannesburg.

“With this judgment, if we had a responsible president, he should be resigning, as you cannot have a president who is preparing for an impeachment process this side and occupying the office at the same time, because one is going to suffer.

“Remember that even if he resigns, he must still come for impeachment,” Malema said. 

He called on Speaker Thoko Didiza to establish the impeachment process immediately.

“Let us see the hands of the DA, which was with us when we impeached, now that they are eating bananas and apples, let us see if they will be able to talk with their full mouths,” he said. 

Malema described the NA, which was dominated by the ANC at the time of voting against the panel’s report, as a shame and commended former minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma for voting with the opposition parties in favour of the report.  

“She acted alone against her own comrades because her conscience was very clear and she was using her conscience as guided by the then Chief Justice that parliamentarians must be guided by their conscience and not by party lines,” Malema told the media. 

However, according to ATM spokesperson Zama Ntshona, the impeachment would be impractical if Ramaphosa resigns. 

“The impeachment process can only be done if the president is a sitting president because once he resigns, we will not be able to impeach him and that is going to deprive us as a country of the important answers that we want,” he said. 

Ntshona said all those involved in allegedly protecting Ramaphosa from accountability should testify in the impeachment.

The Phala Phala scandal was first referred to the then-Public Protector Advocate Busisiwe Mkhwebane, but Ramaphosa was cleared by Mkhwebane’s successor, Advocate Kholeka Gcaleka. 

“I would like to know how the Public Protector did not see that having US$580 000 was a problem.

“The Public Protector that must answer is Gcaleka, who said there was nothing wrong with what President Ramaphosa did,” said Ntshona. 

DA leader Geordin Hill-Lewis said his party, which is now in the Government of National Unity with the Ramaphosa-led ANC, respects the ruling and that “no one should expect the DA to shield wrongdoing”. 

“The court has now made clear that Parliament must correct its rules, and that the Section 89 report must proceed to an impeachment committee. We will never be a party to protecting misconduct, covering up corruption, or weakening accountability for political convenience,” he said in a statement released immediately after the ruling.

Hill-Lewis said the impeachment committee should do its work properly, rationally, fairly, and constitutionally to allow Ramaphosa to account fully.

He said Parliament has been given another opportunity to establish the facts so that South Africans will have confidence that state institutions act without fear, favour, or prejudice.

He said the judgment draws a clear line between the DA and the ANC, which he said has presided over a political culture in which accountability is delayed, diluted, or avoided when it becomes inconvenient.

“The DA will participate fully and constructively in the impeachment committee. We will be guided by the facts, by the evidence placed before the committee, and by our constitutional duty,” Hill-Lewis. 

ANC spokesperson Mahlengi Bhengu told the media that those who have concluded that Ramaphosa will be impeached were running ahead of themselves.

“I will suggest that the matter of possible impeachment of the president, if it does happen, will have a very slim fit considering the calibre of the president that South Africa has at this point,” said Bhengu.

She said the ANC, which she said has always been at the centre of advocating for the rule of law and the Constitution, would still reflect on the judgment.

“At this point in history, we are not going to back down on that, as we are going to respect the judgment, study the judgment, and make amends where we need to make amends.

“The fact that we went to the liberation Struggle was because we wanted the country to be run according to the rule of law, and therefore, there is no way we are going against that which we fought for,” said Bhengu.

She reminded the nation of Ramaphosa’s reputation in the country and across the world.

“Because we are subject to the Constitution, we came to this point where our president had to be tested in this manner. 

“The same president who has stabilised South Africa for the longest time, the same president acclaimed worldwide for leading global peace efforts.

“We will continue to have the same confidence in President Cyril Ramaphosa, but we are going to make sure, as the ANC, that we follow the law to the letter,” she said.

In a statement from Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, Ramaphosa called on the nation to respect the judgment.

“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,” read the statement.

[email protected]