Rabia Mayet | rabiamayet@radioislam.co.za

14 May 2026

3-minute read

Reigniting the impeachment debate around accountability and constitutional processes in his concord drama, President Cyril Ramaphosa is once again at the centre of political and legal turbulence, after the National Assembly’s vote to halt the impeachment process was rendered invalid by the constitutional court.

Comparing the president’s response from 2022 and his current one, Emeritus associate professor of public law Richard Calland from the University of Cape Town refers to the drama as “same but different.” The problem, as well as the challenge to his political leadership and career, still stands, although the circumstances and context is different. In 2022, the president was facing an imminent leadership battle within the ANC, whereas now he has the support of his party. He is now also on a “firm footing” in his endeavour to review the panel’s report.

Professor Calland mentioned that he does not “believe that the evidence stacks up to the requirements of section 89” which would require there to be a serious violation of the law as well as serious misconduct.

He further argued that South Africans should welcome the president’s decision to stay and fight legally, because were the impeachment process to reach parliament, it would undoubtedly turn into a “mud slinging contest.” And if it were to go to a final vote in the National Assembly, it would require a two thirds majority, thus making it very unlikely that President Ramaphosa will be impeached.

On the other hand, had President Ramaphosa resigned back in 2022, putting the then deputy president in power and a new president at the helm 3 weeks later, resulting in a far more unstable and uncertain political landscape. If the president were to resign now, it would be detrimental to the country that has seen the positive side of his “reforming process in parliament” “The country’s best interests would be served by a continuation of his presidency,” the professor stated, and mentioned that for all Ramaphosa’s flaws, he holds a “stabilising leadership” position in the country.

Regarding the report and whether the President should still answer for the findings linked to the Phala-Phala scandal, the professor said that nothing has changed and it is as if the report is “frozen in time” and “full of holes”. Professor Calland feels that instead of the test of prima facie, the panel should have applied the test of sufficient evidence of serious misconduct and breaches of the law, not looked at evidence that they shouldn’t have, and avoided “illogical” conclusions on the insufficient evidence that they did have.

Challenging the panel’s findings could amount to avoiding accountability, but the professor feels that President Ramaphosa is exercising a legitimate constitutional right, and he would be subjecting himself to the very serious impeachment process on an “unfirm, insecure foundation.” Effectively, the president is “doing the right thing” by taking on the responsibility of challenging the court instead of resigning and thus undermining the impeachment process.

While his rivals want him out on the assumption that Paul Mashatile will create space for them, four years later, President Ramaphosa has come out “stronger than ever,” despite the ANC losing its majority. “Within the ANC, there is great confidence in its leadership,” the professor emphasized, and the party itself has become much more intent on fixing problems with “zero appetite for a change in leadership at this point.”

Listen to the full interview with Annisa Essack and Professor Richard Calland here.