Former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo will chair the independent panel that must assess whether President Cyril Ramaphosa has a case to answer in the Section 89 impeachment motion, according to National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula. 

In a statement late on Wednesday, the Speaker named the panel, which alongside Ngcobo comprises retired Gauteng High Court Judge Thokozile Masipa and University of Cape Town public law associate professor Richard Calland. 

Zungula tabled the motion after former spy boss Arthur Fraser, in June 2022, filed a police report about the theft of US dollars from President Cyril Ramaphosa’s farm in Phala Phala, Limpopo, in February 2020. 

Political parties represented in Parliament had submitted 17 names by 1 September for the Speaker to consider as potential panel members. 

Ngcobo, outspoken and highly regarded, was briefly embroiled in controversy in mid-2011 when then president Jacob Zuma’s move to extend his term at the helm of the Constitutional Court was litigated against.  

Ngcobo declined any extension of office in late July 2011. 

In April 2021, he was named to head the no-fault compensation fund required as part of the global agreements with Covid-19 vaccination manufacturers. 

President Cyril Ramaphosa. (Photo: Gallo Images / OJ Koloti)

Visit Daily Maverick’s home page for more news, analysis and investigations

The other members of the panel

Judge Masipa is probably best known by the public for finding Paralympian Oscar Pistorius not guilty of the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, but convicting him on a lesser count. The 2014 ruling was overturned on appeal and Pistorius’s jail time increased from six to 15 years. 

Calland is a public law academic, columnist and author. 

No date has yet been set for the three-strong independent assessment panel to begin its work, which will be done on papers, not public hearings, and will include input from Ramaphosa. 

“The Speaker wishes to sincerely thank the panel members for their acceptance of her invitation and accordingly wishes them well in their important task ahead,” said the official statement from Parliament on Wednesday evening.

The date for the commencement of the committee’s work will be published in the Announcements, Tablings and Committee Reports, the record of the national legislature’s work. 

According to parliamentary rules, 30 days are allocated for the independent panel to complete its assessment in this step of the process toward an impeachment inquiry. The panel’s report and recommendations must go to the House for a vote. 

If the panel, in its report to Parliament, recommends Ramaphosa has nothing to answer for then, once the National Assembly adopts that recommendation, it’s the end of any removal proceedings.  

If the panel recommends to Parliament that Ramaphosa has a case to answer, and the House adopts this, then the next phase kicks in — a Section 89 impeachment committee of MPs to inquire into the President’s fitness for office. That process involves public hearings, which ultimately must lead to a decision that is backed by the National Assembly. 

While Ramaphosa has told the ANC Limpopo conference the Phala Phala dollars came from the sale of game, he’s also spoken to the governing party’s Integrity Commission.  

After extensions, the Public Protector received responses that, according to News24, name Dubai-based Sudanese businessman Hazim Mustafa for paying Ramaphosa $580,000 in December 2019 for buffalo.  

Ramaphosa’s answers to questions by the South African Reserve Bank about exchange control, and possibly other, contraventions were due on 8 September after an earlier extension. 

The Hawks are investigating, Police Minister Bheki Cele also confirmed recently in the House. 

However, Ramaphosa has yet to answer in Parliament on details of the Phala Phala saga. He’s invoked due process and, according to his replies in the disrupted 30 August presidential Q&A in the House, he’s been “advised and counselled” to respond only once the various investigations have been completed. 

To date, Parliament has not pushed for answers. Mapisa-Nqakula has declined a DA request for an ad hoc committee, and the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence decided to ditch a probe, as “no independently verifiable information” was available over claims that Deputy State Security Minister Zizi Kodwa was involved in a cover-up of the scandal and had used Crime Intelligence covert funds.

The Section 89 presidential removal process has repeatedly been invoked as another way of soliciting accountability.

It’s unclear if that’s a tactic to deflect the shadow over Ramaphosa ahead of the ANC’s elective conference in December, or whether the President and the ANC parliamentary caucus are convinced no grounds for impeachment exist against Ramaphosa. DM