Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba and SARS commissioner Tom Moyane during a media briefing ahead of the 2018 budget speech on February 21, 2018 in Cape Town, South Africa. (Photo by Gallo Images / Sunday Times / Esa Alexander) 
To state it first, it seems inevitable that Tom Moyane will attempt to lodge a legal challenge to the president’s decision. It has taken Ramaphosa a full eight months from his own election to formally remove Moyane, through the process of a suspension and then not one, but two, inquiries. In the end, it appears it was the finding of Judge Robert Nugent that SARS could not be fixed unless Moyane was removed that Ramaphosa relied upon. This is despite the fact that Nugent himself has said his report is not final, but that his ultimate recommendation will not change.
Having the benefit of hindsight, it was wise of Ramaphosa to institute both inquiries. It was always unlikely that they would come to different conclusions, but it was always possible that they would move at different speeds. Also, if the finding of one is somehow overturned by a court, the other could always be relied upon to justify the final dismissal.
It is also another display of Ramaphosa’s patient approach to dealing with what once used to be State Capture HQ. For many months there have been impatient calls on him to act sooner and with more apparent vengeance, to remove Moyane, to appoint a new National Director of Public Prosecutions, to remove Malusi Gigaba, Bathabile Dlamini and Nomvula Mokonyane. Before that, there was a clamour for him to urgently remove Supra Mahumapelo, and before that, to speedily dispatch Zuma himself.
And yet, his approach in almost every case has simply been to institute whatever needs to be instituted, and then to sit back and wait. And each time it has worked for him, even if a legal process was not available.
There was a time, for about 10 days in February, when it looked as though Zuma would never leave (especially when both Ace Magashule and Jessie Duarte said he would not), but in the end Ramaphosa won out. Exactly the same dynamic played out with Mahumapelo; the wait was excruciating, but for Ramaphosa, it was worth it.
In Moyane's case, it appears the same thing has happened.
It should also not be forgotten that there was much more at stake than just a legal process and its outcome. Instead the nation saw, again as has happened so often recently, how testimony under oath can bear real political consequences. Current and former SARS officials queued up to explain what had happened at the institution. And then came the bombshell that Moyane had been planning what to do at SARS a full year before being appointed to the post, in collusion with the South African managing partner of Bain and Company, a consultancy that must surely join the ranks of KPMG and McKinsey in having to now apply for their social licence to continue operations in this country.
These astounding revelations, given under oath and broadcast live to the nation on radio and television, ensured that what is now called “the narrative” swung well behind Ramaphosa. Despite the protestations of Moyane’s lawyers, this was probably a turning point in the inquiry. There was not much support for Moyane even before the commission. Since the Bain admission, there have been almost no public gestures of support for Moyane. And who would support him now?
That said, it is entirely likely that he is going to challenge this outcome in court. Moyane, or rather the EFF National Chair Dali Mpofu, will argue that his rights have somehow been infringed, that Ramaphosa should have waited for one of the inquiries to issue a final report first. And Mpofu will also argue that having two inquiries in the first place was unfair. But most of the public won’t care. Instead, non-EFF Twitter will continue asking why a party that received funding from a cigarette smuggler is now allowing Mpofu to represent a fired SARS Commissioner. Perhaps more immediately important to Moyane, it is possible that any further challenges will have to be funded from his own pocket or from those of his political supporters. But, generally speaking, as Moyane refused to give any evidence in the Nugent Inquiry, courts take a dim view of someone approaching them when they did not use the opportunities given to them at the previous level.
In the meantime, SARS, perhaps, can start with the process of rebuilding. It took an interview, not with Moyane, but