EFF asks ConCourt to overturn High Court order that paused Ramaphosa Phala Phala impeachment

According to The Citizen, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have asked the Constitutional Court to overturn a Western Cape High Court ruling that halted Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment process into President Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala matter.

Party joins ATM’s urgent court bid

According to The Citizen, the EFF filed papers backing the African Transformation Movement’s (ATM) urgent application and seeks to join an application already brought by Vuyo Zungula and the ATM. In a founding affidavit deposed by EFF President Julius Malema, the party set out its reasons for asking the Constitutional Court to intervene.

Core legal dispute

According to The Citizen, the legal battle centres on whether the president can use the courts to suspend a constitutional process designed to hold him accountable while he reviews the independent Panel Report. The Western Cape High Court majority stayed “public impeachment hearings” pending the president’s review of the Panel Report, a decision the EFF strongly opposes.

EFF’s position on the Panel Report

According to The Citizen, the EFF aligned itself with the minority judgment of Francis J, which stated that the Panel Report remains valid and operative “unless and until set aside”. The EFF says a mere review application cannot dislodge that status, and that the Impeachment Committee remains entitled to rely on the report, which found a “prima facie case for the Impeachment Committee to consider”.

Separation of powers and constitutional concern

According to The Citizen, the EFF argues the High Court’s interim interdict “severely violates the separation of powers” and is, in substance, a “constitutional interdict” that “temporarily immobilises Parliament from carrying out its core and exclusive constitutional function”.

The party, through Malema, maintains that holding the Executive to account is “primarily and exclusively the function of Parliament” and warns that “every second that the order operates, Parliament’s constitutional accountability function is curtailed”.

Legal reasoning criticised

According to The Citizen, the EFF accuses the High Court majority of misapplying the OUTA principle. The party says the court should have asked “how fundamentally is it Parliament’s function to hold the President accountable?” and noted that because this function lies at the “heartland, primary and exclusive domain of Parliament,” the court should have been highly disinclined to intervene.

Public interest and urgency

According to The Citizen, the EFF emphasises that the matter is of “great national importance” and requires “prompt attention”. The party warns that leaving the impeachment process “suspended in mid-air” harms the public interest and undermines constitutional democracy, and cautions that the majority’s reasoning could enable any constitutional office-bearer to halt accountability processes by launching a review and alleging reputational or “rule of law” harm.