Zuma Draws a Line: Demands Ramaphosa Resign by Friday Over ‘Illegal’ Cabinet Moves

A new front in SA’s political war

Former President Jacob Zuma has issued a bold and fiery ultimatum to President Cyril Ramaphosa: resign by 10am this Friday or face unspecified legal action. The standoff follows Zuma’s growing frustration over what he calls repeated breaches of the Constitution, particularly the controversial appointment of Professor Firoz Cachalia as acting police minister.

This challenge, issued in a sharply worded legal letter, is the latest twist in a political drama that has gripped the nation and deepened the divide between South Africa’s ruling elites.

A bruising court loss fuels the fire

The MK Party, led by Zuma, suffered a recent blow in the Constitutional Court, which tossed out their urgent application seeking to invalidate Ramaphosa’s executive decisions. The Court concluded that the matter didn’t meet the threshold for direct access, effectively blocking Zuma’s legal route at least for now.

But instead of backing down, Zuma doubled down.

Through his attorneys at KMNS, Zuma is now exploring fresh legal avenues, including the High Court, to pursue his claims that Ramaphosa’s reshuffle was not just wrong, it was illegal, irrational, and unconstitutional.

So, what’s this really about?
Zuma’s fury centers on Ramaphosa’s 13 July decision to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on leave and temporarily install Cachalia, a respected law professor, in his place. That move was tied to the launch of a commission of inquiry, led by retired Justice Madlanga, into serious allegations of political meddling in police affairs.

The allegations, first aired by KwaZulu-Natal’s top cop Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi, include disturbing claims that senior officials, including Mchunu and deputy commissioner Shadrack Sibiya, may have interfered with investigations, halted task forces, and redirected dockets, all potentially derailing the integrity of law enforcement.

Zuma wants answers or else

In the letter, Zuma demands 15 specific answers from Ramaphosa, including the exact timing of Mchunu’s leave, the constitutional basis for Cachalia’s appointment, and whether terms like “Minister Designate” have any real meaning in law.

His attorneys argue that, regardless of the answers, the president’s conduct remains “unlawful” and has caused lasting harm to citizens and taxpayers. They’re now pressing for Ramaphosa to:

• Revoke the 13 July and 31 July announcements

• Undo Cachalia’s swearing-in

• And ultimately, resign

The deadline for these demands? 10:00 AM on Friday, 8 August.

Government’s response: “Let the lawyers handle it”
Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya acknowledged receiving the letter but kept the response minimal, saying only, “The legal team will deal with it.”

Behind the scenes, however, the matter is anything but simple. The Madlanga-led commission, which Zuma is now trying to delegitimize, has already been greenlit to proceed and is set to cost the taxpayer R147.9 million, according to Justice Department spokesperson Terence Manase.

Public reaction: Political theater or legal reckoning?

Unsurprisingly, social media lit up after Zuma’s letter went public. Some users called it a “distraction tactic” by a man still smarting from legal defeats and political sidelining. Others say Zuma is raising valid questions about executive overreach.

Political analysts, however, are more circumspect. They note that Zuma’s letter is less about the legality of one appointment and more about undermining Ramaphosa’s political legitimacy, particularly after the MK Party’s ConCourt defeat.

What’s next? A familiar playbook

Zuma’s maneuver echoes his past legal strategies: question the process, challenge the constitutionality, and draw out the fight in public. It’s a classic move in his arsenal, apply pressure through courts, letters, and the court of public opinion.

But this time, the stakes are higher. Ramaphosa has staked his leadership on restoring trust in state institutions. The Mkhwanazi allegations, if proven true, suggest a deeper rot in policing, something the president seems intent on exposing, even if it steps on political toes.

A crisis of confidence?

At its core, this is more than a legal spat. It’s a clash of legacies, a test of South Africa’s institutions, and a litmus test for whether the country can separate governance from grievance.

As Friday’s deadline looms, one thing is clear: Zuma isn’t fading quietly. And Ramaphosa? He’s running out of political room to maneuver without pushing back hard or taking an even bolder stand.

{Source: The Citizen}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com