By Thys Khiba – National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula has rejected the opposition party EFF’s request for Parliament to reinvestigate President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala Farm scandal after Constitutional Court dismissed Ramaphosa’s application .
“The National Assembly does not permit the establishment of a Section 89 inquiry against the president without a prescribed process,” said Mapisa-Nqakula.
This comes after the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) reacted to the ConCourt’s ruling against Ramaphosa, by writting to Mapisa-Nqakula to establish an ad hoc committee to investigate the 2020 Phala Phala farm scandal events.
The ConCourt dismissed Ramaphosa’s bid for direct access to the apex court to challenge the Section 89 Independent Panel Report.
Mapisa-Nqakula said: “That judgement just says there is no case for the ConCourt to be petitioned directly. It’s therefore not a blow to the president as others have been alluding to.”
The EFF indicated that it will be irrational for the Speaker to refuse their call to hold Ramaphosa accountable.
“We have therefore written to the of Speaker to demand the establishment of an ad hoc committee to investigate all crimes committed in Phala Phala and to formally establish the impeachment process against Mr. Cyril Ramaphosa,” said EFF in a statement.
EFF President Julius Malema addressing the party’s Press Conference on Sunday .
The party has welcomed the ConCourt ruling against Ramaphosa.
“The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) welcomes the Constitutional Court’s ruling against Mr. Cyril Ramaphosa on his direct application to the Constitutional Court, to reverse the findings and recommendations of an independent Parliamentary Inquiry, into allegations of wrongdoing in Phala Phala Farm.”
The publicly shared Section 89 Independent Panel Report indicated that Ramaphosa may have a prima facie case to answer in connection with the theft of money from his Limpopo farm.
The EFF says Ramaphosa’s legal approach to the ConCourt was an attempt by him to prevent Parliament from holding him accountable on what could have happened in Ramaphosa’s farm.
“Parliament has an obligation to find out and reveal to the people of South Africa as to the origins of the millions of dollars found in Ramaphosa’s Farm, and also expose the nefarious roles played by members of the South African Police Services, an the inaction of other important State institutions.”
The court argued no case has been made for it to grant direct access and to intervene in the matter.
Spokesperson to the President, Vincent Magwenya indicated that Ramaphosa will consider other remedies following the ConCourt’s ruling.
Meanwhile, the ATM leader Vuyo Zungula indicated that the ConCourt ruling dealt with the merits of the case.
“The President sought three things basically three things. It was direct access, exclusive jurisdiction and the application to intervene.
“So, what the court said is that all three-applications of the president or what the president asked in that application have been dismissed. That application to intervene basically speaks to the substance or merit of the case. If it’s not a blow- I don’t know what it could be therefore what that effectively means is that there is no legal grounding for Mr Ramaphosa– to say that report is legally flawed,” said African Transformation Movement leader Zungula.
CENTRAL NEWS
—————————————————————
DO YOU HAVE A NEWS STORY OR AN OPINION FOR CENTRAL NEWS: E-mail us : newsroom@centralnews.co.za or Whatsapp us on 0814955487