In brief
In a landmark decision, a South African court granted President Cyril Ramaphosa a temporary injunction stopping the parliamentary committee from proceeding with an impeachment inquiry triggered by the 2020 ‘Farmgate’ scandal. The scandal was sparked by a burglary that exposed a hidden stash of $580,000 on Ramaphosa’s private farm. Following an independent panel’s findings, Parliament had reportedly shelved a formal probe, but the Constitutional Court ruled the move unlawful. Ramaphosa’s legal team argued that continuing the inquiry would severely damage his reputation before the court resolved their separate challenge to the panel’s report. The judge ordered that the committee’s work be paused until the court a full hearing in September. Opposition voices warned that the ruling was a political strategy, while the ANC defended the president and criticised politically motivated distortions. The ruling comes amid a shift in South Africa’s political landscape, where the governing ANC no longer holds a majority and is dependent on a coalition alliance.
A South African court has granted President Cyril Ramaphosa a temporary injunction on Friday, halting the parliamentary committee that had been set up to investigate a possible impeachment over the 2020 ‘Farmgate’ scandal.
The allegations stem from a burglary at the president’s private farm in Limpopo province, where thieves reportedly stole around $580,000 in U.S. dollars that had been hidden inside a sofa. The theft was first revealed by former spy chief Arthur Fraser in 2022, who claimed the president had concealed the incident from authorities, potentially breaching exchange-control laws. Ramaphosa, however, has denied any wrongdoing and claimed the cash came from the sale of buffaloes.
In May, the Constitutional Court ruled that Parliament had acted unlawfully when it shelved an independent panel’s report on the theft. That ruling opened the door for a formal impeachment inquiry, but the committee’s work was suspended by this week’s court order, which remains in force until a further hearing scheduled for September.
Ramaphosa’s lawyers argued that proceeding with the inquiry before the court resolved their separate legal challenge would cause “irreparable reputational harm.” The judge agreed, holding that until the court reached a final decision on the panel’s findings, the impeachment process could not resume. The ruling delivers a strategic reprieve amid a changing political climate where the ANC no longer holds a parliamentary majority and must rely on a coalition partnership formed after the 2024 elections.
Opposition parties reacted sharply: the Democratic Alliance said the injunction was not unexpected but did not halt the committee’s preparatory work, while the former President Jacob Zuma’s party, uMkhonto weSizwe, accused Ramaphosa of using the courts to stifle an investigation. The ANC touted the decision as a safeguard against “politically motivated distortions.”
The court’s decision will remain a pivotal point for South Africa’s political narrative, as the president prepares to appeal the panel’s findings in a separate case set for September.
