Cape Town – The Constitutional Court has dismissed President Cyril Ramaphosa’s attempt to seek direct access to the apex court to challenge the Section 89 report that found he has a case to answer in the Phala Phala farm scandal.
In an order released by the court on Wednesday, registrar Sibusiso Mapossa said the Constitutional Court had considered Ramaphosa’s application brought by way of exclusive jurisdiction or, alternatively, by way of direct access and the application to intervene.
“It has concluded that no case has been made out for exclusive jurisdiction or direct access, and the main application must be dismissed.
“Consequently, the application to intervene falls to be dismissed,” Mapossa said.
He also said the court had decided not to award costs.
Ramaphosa filed his review application in the Constitutional Court in early December to set aside the Section 89 independent panel report on the Phala Phala saga.
In his notice of application, Ramaphosa cited the three members of the panel, National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula and the ATM leader Vuyolwethu Zungula, the party sponsor of the motion of no confidence against him, as the respondents.
The application followed the Section 89 report that concluded that the information placed before the panel disclosed, prima facie, that Ramaphosa may have committed a serious violation of the law and the Constitution.
In his affidavit, Ramaphosa said the recommendations of the panel were reviewable under the constitutional principle of legality.
“I submit that the panel misconceived its mandate, misjudged the information placed before it and misinterpreted the four charges against me.
“It moreover strayed beyond the four charges and considered matters not properly before it,” he said.
Ramaphosa also said just like Parliament was required to act lawfully, the panel should also do the same when conducting an inquiry.
The president argued in his papers that the panel interpreted its remit to determine “whether sufficient evidence exist” to mean “whether there is prima facie case against president”.
“It concluded that information before it ‘discloses, prima facie’ that the president may have been guilty of serious misconduct. The panel was thus mistaken,” he said.
He argued that the panel should have determined whether “sufficient evidence exists” to warrant an impeachment process.
The court papers were filed while the ANC national executive committee was locked in a marathon meeting ahead of the hybrid session of the National Assembly to consider the report.
Parliament has since decided to vote against the report, but the ATM has taken its decision on judicial review in the Western Cape High Court.
It also wants the court to order a secret ballot when the report is taken on vote.
Cape Times