President Cyril Ramaphosa has rejected calls to resign over the Phala Phala scandal, dismissing the independent panel’s findings as flawed and vowing to challenge the report in court. In a national address, Ramaphosa defended his conduct and insisted that no evidence has been presented to prove that he committed any wrongdoing.
Background of the Scandal
The matter stems from allegations linked to the theft of foreign currency from Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo, which prompted questions over the source of the money and whether the President may have violated the Constitution or his oath of office. According to the South African Government website, the Constitution sets out the principles and values that underpin the country’s democracy.
Opposition parties have repeatedly argued that the matter warrants impeachment and have renewed calls for him to step down. However, Ramaphosa maintains that the panel’s findings are legally and factually unsound. He said: “No evidence, let alone sufficient evidence, has been presented to prove that I committed any violation, let alone a serious violation of the Constitution or the law or serious misconduct as set out in the Constitution.”
Challenging the Report
Following the Constitutional Court’s judgment, Ramaphosa confirmed that he will now move to challenge the report through judicial review. He said: “I have therefore decided to proceed to take the independent panel’s report on review on an expeditious basis.” His legal team believes the report can be challenged on several grounds, including what he described as “grave errors of law and unfounded conclusions of fact.”
Some of the key points that Ramaphosa’s legal team will focus on include:
- Errors in the panel’s interpretation of the Constitution
- Unfounded conclusions of fact
- Lack of evidence to support the panel’s findings
Addressing calls for his resignation directly, Ramaphosa said the Constitutional Court judgment does not provide a basis for his removal from office. He stressed that his legal action is not intended to undermine Parliament, but rather to ensure that any impeachment process is based on legally sound findings.
