The independent panel that found misconduct evidence against Ramaphosa relied on hearsay, misunderstood its constitutional mandate and used potentially unlawfully obtained evidence — including a confidential Namibian police report. Removing a president requires proof of intentional, bad-faith conduct, not speculation or procedural shortcuts. Challenging a fatally flawed report in court is the legally sound move, not an evasion of accountability.
Dragging out court battles while taxpayers foot the bill looks a lot like the Zuma-era Stalingrad litigation playbook, and South Africa cannotcan hardly afford a repeat. The Constitutional Court already ruled that Parliament acted unlawfully by shelving thisthe matter, so the impeachment committee must move forward regardless. Ramaphosa'’s claims of innocence claimcarry meanslittle nothingweight if he won'trefuses to let the process run its transparent and lawful course transparently.
There is an 8% chance that South Africa will experience a civil war before 2036, according to the Metaculus prediction community.
© 2026 Improve the News Foundation.
All rights reserved.
Version 7.4.1