ANC rejects claims of factional clash over Ramaphosa interdict bid

The African National Congress has denied reports of a factional “fracas” after it filed and then withdrew a protective notice in relation to President Cyril Ramaphosa’s court bid to interdict Parliament’s impeachment committee. The party said its actions were procedural and taken to preserve options while legal advice was finalised.

Party says move was procedural, not a climbdown

The ANC said reports that there was a factional clash within its National Working Committee (NWC) were inaccurate. “The ANC rejects this characterisation in the strongest terms. There was no fracas, there was no climbdown, and there was no improper instruction. The facts are straightforward,” the party said.

According to the ANC, a court case-management directive issued on 18 June 2026 created a filing window of less than twenty-four hours for any parliamentary party that wished to intervene. To preserve the movement’s position within that compressed timeline, the ANC said it filed a protective notice while senior counsel finalised advice.

The ANC said the protective notice was withdrawn after the NWC resolved that, if the party participated at all, it would appear only as amicus curiae (a friend of the court), confined to questions of process and sequencing and taking no position on the merits of the case.

President not at NWC meeting, party says

The ANC emphasised that President Cyril Ramaphosa was not present at the NWC meeting where the matter was discussed and rejected suggestions that he directed or influenced the NWC’s decision. “Any suggestion that the President directed, instructed, or influenced the decision of the NWC is entirely unfounded,” the party said.

The ANC described its approach as “orderly legal sequencing on the advice of counsel” and said that this was a collective decision taken by the NWC. The party quoted Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula: there is “nothing untoward” about settling its posture in this manner.

Background: Ramaphosa’s interdict and media reports

President Ramaphosa had filed papers in the Western Cape High Court seeking an interdict to prevent the impeachment committee from commencing its inquiry pending the outcome of his review application related to the Independent Panel report. The interdict matter is scheduled to be heard on 15 and 16 July.

The Sunday Times reported that Ramaphosa was unhappy after learning the ANC had filed an urgent application to intervene rather than seeking to participate in broader review proceedings, and that he personally ordered the party to withdraw its bid. The ANC rejected that account.

Independent voices: disagreement and criticism

Commentators quoted in coverage offered differing perspectives. University of South Africa professor Dirk Kotzé said:

“there are always differences of opinion”

at meetings such as the NEC or NWC, and added that the important question is whether the body can reach a collective conclusion.

Political analyst Sipho Seepe argued the ANC should not involve itself in the personal business of the president and said the party’s involvement had created difficulties. Seepe said:

“I think if Ramaphosa has asked the ANC to withdraw, it makes sense from the perspective that the ANC will have to explain themselves, how does Phala Phala fit into government? How does Phala Phala fit you into the ANC agenda?”

Seepe also said:

“Phala Phala is a headache for the ANC, and it’s a headache for the ANC because the ANC has chosen to defend a person on personal matters that are not political.”

What the ANC says it will do next

The ANC reiterated that should it participate in the matter it will do so only as a friend of the court on issues of process and sequencing and will take no position on the merits. The party framed such participation as a defence of a court-ordered process and a respect for the separation of powers.