Political analyst Prince Mashele has accused President Cyril Ramaphosa of weaponising the judicial system to maintain his grip on political power, after Ramaphosa announced he would legally challenge the Section 89 Independent Panel report which stated he may have breached his oath of office in the Phala Phala farm scandal. This follows a Constitutional Court ruling on 8 May 2026 that Parliament acted unconstitutionally by blocking an impeachment inquiry and ordered the panel’s findings to be referred to an Impeachment Committee.
Criticism From Political Figures And Legal Experts
Mashele’s criticism came after President Ramaphosa’s 12 May declaration that he would seek a judicial review of the independent panel report. “Cyril Ramaphosa will go down in history as one of the most useless presidents we have had after 1994,” Mashele said, arguing that the President is exploiting legal avenues to avoid accountability over the handling of foreign cash stolen from his Phala Phala farm in 2020.
Former ANC MP Mervyn Dirks also questioned Ramaphosa’s motives, stating, “Ramaphosa knows that the committee, composed of members from other political parties, will ask tough questions regarding the scandal.” Dirks described the President’s legal challenge as a strategic move to evade direct scrutiny by the Impeachment Committee. The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) echoed these concerns, with an EFF spokesperson claiming, “Ramaphosa is using the courts to avoid accountability and delay the impeachment inquiry.”
Broader Political Context And National Significance
The controversy centres on allegations that President Ramaphosa failed to disclose and properly handle the theft of large sums of foreign currency from his Phala Phala farm. A Section 89 Independent Panel, tasked with assessing whether Ramaphosa’s actions rose to the level of impeachable conduct, concluded last year that he may have violated his constitutional duties. The panel’s findings set the stage for an impeachment inquiry, but Parliament’s initial refusal to proceed was later deemed unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court. The resulting Impeachment Committee will now examine the panel’s conclusions and determine the President’s political fate.
Legal experts note that while judicial reviews are a legitimate feature of constitutional democracy, Ramaphosa’s move has raised fears of protracted litigation delaying decisive parliamentary action. The dispute has exposed rifts within the ruling ANC and heightened tensions ahead of national elections, with opposition parties portraying the matter as a test of executive accountability in South Africa’s constitutional order.
The Impeachment Committee is expected to convene in the coming weeks, with growing pressure on Parliament to ensure a transparent and timely process.