Ramaphosa objects to impeachment committee evidence leader

President Cyril Ramaphosa has objected to the appointment of Advocate Thandazani Madonsela,SC,as the impeachment committee’s evidence leader.

Graphic: Sharlene Rood. Images: Storm Simpson/News24; South African Police Service

President Cyril Ramaphosa has objected to Advocate Thandazani Madonsela’s appointment as evidence leader of the impeachment committee,citing conflicts of interest.Opposition parties have accused Ramaphosa of using delaying tactics to avoid accountability.The committee voted to seek a legal opinion on the matter,with only the MKP and EFF opposing,delaying further decisions to a future meeting.Opposition parties have accused President Cyril Ramaphosa of employing delaying tactics after he wrote to the Parliamentary impeachment committee to object to the evidence leader it agreed to appoint through a vote.

Two weeks ago,the committee voted to ask Parliament to appoint Advocate Thandazani Madonsela,as its evidence leader. The ANC abstained from that vote.

Subsequently,the ANC complained that Madonsela had previously provided it with a legal opinion on the impeachment process.

Then,on Tuesday evening,the committee received a letter from Ramaphosa.

ADVERTISEMENT

“In terms of the draft terms of reference published on Parliament’s website,the chief evidence leader must not have any real or perceived conflict of interest. I am of the view that Advocate Thandazani Madonsela,does not satisfy this requirement,” wrote Ramaphosa.

He claimed Madonsela is conflicted because he removed him from the Judicial Service Commission in 2022.

“In these circumstances,there is a reasonable apprehension that Advocate Madonsela,may harbour a sense of grievance towards me and that he may act upon it.”

Ramaphosa also raised the legal opinion to the ANC as a possible conflict of interest.

ADVERTISEMENT

Ramaphosa wrote:

On the information presently available,therefore,it seems to me that the appointment of Advocate Madonsela,will violate the above principles. Therefore,I submit that his appointment should not be confirmed.

Opposition parties accused Ramaphosa of attempting to delay the committee and to select his own evidence leader during Wednesday morning’s committee meeting,where the committee was due to receive an update on the process to appoint Madonsela. Parliament must appoint the evidence leader on the committee’s recommendation.

EFF leader Julius Malema said: “He is not going to choose his own judge,that’s what he is doing.”

He said it was the committee’s job to select an evidence leader.

“Typical [of] him,he is trying to find another way to delay this process,” said Malema.

“We are not going to allow that.”

READ | Timeline: How the Phala Phala saga played out

ActionSA chief whip Lerato Ngobeni said South Africans should take note that the president was hiding from accountability.

“There are mischievous things going on in this process,” she said.

“Please,we must proceed with the process; we cannot be held to ransom.

“It looks like this process is never going to take off. It’s very clear as to what the motives are.”

ATM MP Vuyo Zungula said: “It is to be expected that the president will not subject himself to this process,a constitutional process of holding him accountable.

“It is a delaying tactic.”

MKP parliamentary leader John Hlophe said: “A president who has nothing to hide should not be using all these delaying tactics. He is doing that in an attempt to avoid the inevitable. South Africans [have] a right to know what happened at Phala Phala. President Ramaphosa is delaying that. We cannot allow that.”

Hlophe said Ramaphosa’s objections make “no sense at all”.

Parties in the government of national unity proposed obtaining a legal opinion before moving forward,as did ACDP MP Steve Swart.

ANC MPs Cameron Dugmore,Faith Muthambi and Dikeledi Direko denied that Ramaphosa was trying to stall the process.

ADVERTISEMENT

ALSO READ | Impeachment interruptus: When will the Phala Phala questions be answered?

“It is not correct to say that a letter from the president means that he is trying to choose the evidence leader,” said Dugmore.

DA parliamentary leader George Michalakis said the committee should apply their minds to the issue of Madonsela having provided the ANC with a legal opinion. FF Plus MP Wouter Wessels also proposed that they consider a legal opinion on the matter,albeit that the committee should protect itself against “Stalingrad tactics”.

Committee chairperson,Rise Mzansi MP Makashule Gana,also asked the committee to allow legal services to consider the matter. He said he did not feel he had the time to fully consider the letter.

“One of the worst mistakes we can make as a committee is to believe the work we do is beyond scrutiny,” Gana said.

He said he wanted to avoid the matter being taken to court.

The matter was taken to a vote; only the MKP and EFF voted against obtaining a legal opinion.

The matter will be considered at a future meeting.