The EFF has pushed back against arguments from the Presidency that unchecked parliamentary processes could cause irreparable reputational and political harm before a final decision is reached.
The EFF has launched an urgent Constitutional Court appeal seeking to overturn a Western Cape High Court ruling that halted parliamentary public hearings into Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm matter.
The party wants the Constitutional Court to set aside the High Court decision, arguing that the judiciary improperly prevented the Section 89 committee from carrying out constitutional duties.
EFF Member of Parliament Mazwi Blose said the argument that Ramaphosa could suffer irreparable harm does not hold, because the impeachment inquiry would give Ramaphosa an opportunity to respond publicly to allegations. “I really don’t understand that argument, by the way, to say that when a person has been given a platform to clear their name, they argue that there will be irreparable harm caused to them,” Blose said.
Blose said the purpose of the Section 89 process is to place Ramaphosa before Parliament and the public to provide answers. “Because precisely what the impeachment inquiry seeks to do is to bring the president to the forefront, in front of the public, in front of SA, and say: clear your name,” Blose said.
Blose argued that Ramaphosa’s legal challenge is aimed at delaying accountability rather than preventing harm. “So I don’t understand why the president says he’s going to suffer irreparable harm. There’s no such thing that’s going to happen,” Blose said.
The EFF maintains that allowing court action to halt parliamentary oversight could create a dangerous precedent for accountability involving public office bearers.
According to Blose, the matter should proceed so that Ramaphosa can explain what happened at Phala Phala. “It’s just tactics for him to delay accountability, and he doesn’t want to be held accountable and to tell the truth in terms of what would have happened on that farm,” Blose said.
The party says the Constitutional Court must clarify the boundaries between judicial intervention and Parliament’s constitutional oversight role.
–SABC/ChannelAfrica–
