Ramaphosa Wins Interdict Halting Phala Phala Impeachment Hearings

Western Cape Division of the High Court

The Western Cape Division of the High Court delivered a divided judgment on Friday morning, granting President Cyril Ramaphosa an interdict to stay Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment committee from proceeding with its public impeachment inquiry in the Phala Phala saga. The legal battle stems from a parliamentary panel report led by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, which concluded that Ramaphosa had a case to answer over the theft of $580,000 in cash hidden in his sofa at his Phala Phala game farm in 2020.

In May, the Constitutional Court cleared the path for impeachment proceedings to begin when it ordered Parliament to refer the panel report to an impeachment committee. The matter was heard over two days last week by a full bench of Le Grange, Matthew Francis and Diane Davis, who reserved judgment. This court has carefully considered the weighty arguments advanced by the parties in the limited time available, given the urgency of the matter, Judge Andre le Grange said when reading the judgment on Friday morning, 24 July 2026. The judgment was not unanimous, with Le Grange indicating that the second of the judgments delivered was the majority judgment. “There are three judgments. The first judgment concludes, for reasons set out therein, that the president has not made out a case for an interim interdict. It proposes that the application be dismissed. The second judgment concludes that the president has made out a case for an interim interdict, for the reasons set out in that judgment. It proposes that an interdict of limited duration be granted. The third judgment concurs with the second judgment. The second judgment is the majority judgment,” Le Grange continued.

“Pending the determination by this court of the applicant’s review, the first and second respondents are interdicted from proceeding with public impeachment hearings in terms of [one] of the National Assembly rules.”

Judge André le Grange, Western Cape High Court

National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza

The first and second respondents in the matter are National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza and the Section 89 impeachment committee chair, Rise Mzansi MP Makashule Gana. Ramaphosa had sought to stay a public impeachment inquiry to probe his conduct in the Phala Phala affair pending a legal review of the report of the Section 89 panel led by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo. The inquiry also includes questions over the source of the money, whether the foreign currency was legally declared and why he did not immediately report the theft to the police. Advocate Wim Trengove, for the president, had argued that putting him through a public inquiry before the report was tested in court risked doing him an injustice that could not be undone. Opposition parties opposed the bid, calling it an attempt to buy time. The African Transformation Movement (ATM), Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), uMkhonto Wesizwe (MK) and United African Transformation (UAT) parties opposed his application for an urgent interdict. Parliament’s impeachment committee, chaired by Gana, also opposed the interdict on legal grounds.

The committee had refused to wait for the ruling, meeting on Wednesday to work through its draft terms of reference and to narrow its list of candidates to lead evidence against the president. Chairperson Makashule Gana said the committee would carry on until a court told it otherwise. Gana said the president’s own counsel had told the court the committee’s work so far was preparatory, including appointing evidence leaders, preparing witnesses and finalising the terms of reference.

Chairperson of Parliament’s Impeachment Committee Makashule Gana

Having consulted with Parliament’s legal unit following the judgment on Friday, Gana said that the next meeting of the committee won’t be affected by the court order. “The preparatory work of the impeachment committee will continue. They indicated to me that the only part that has been interdicted is holding the public hearings on this matter pending the review application by President Cyril Ramaphosa. All other work in preparation for this committee has not been interdicted,” said Gana. Gana said that he will continue to discharge his duties as the head of the committee which includes finalising the name of an evidence leader that will be recommended for appointment, as well as finalising the inquiry’s terms of reference. “That part of the work has not been interdicted. So, we are not going to interdict ourselves from the parts that the court has not interdicted us. We will continue to prepare ourselves, and in the case the review application is successful or not successful, we will cross that bridge when we get to it. For now, we have to do our work,” said Gana.

The report Ramaphosa is challenging is the reason he is before the committee, and his review of it is set down from September 2 to 4. The so-called Phala-Phala scandal has been one of Ramaphosa’s major political headaches since he became the country’s leader in 2018. The impeachment committee includes representatives from all political parties in the country’s Parliament. Most parties said Friday they would study the judgment and consider whether to appeal. Ramaphosa welcomed Friday’s judgment, according to his office, which said he would cooperate with and abide by processes of accountability. Ramaphosa’s spokesperson Vincent Magwenya said the president respects the ruling. [He] reaffirms his respect of judicial independence and separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution, Magwenya said. The President will continue to cooperate with and abide by processes of accountability. He said the costs of the application would stand over for determination by the court hearing the review.