![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/radioislam.org.za\/a\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/cyril.jpg?resize=300%2C169&ssl=1\")
<\/p>\nRabia Mayet | rabiamayet@radioislam.co.za<\/p>\n
14 May 2026<\/p>\n
3-minute read<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
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\u2019s vote to halt the impeachment process was rendered invalid by the constitutional court.<\/p>\n
Comparing the president\u2019s 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 \u201csame but different.\u201d 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 \u201cfirm footing\u201d in his endeavour to review the panel\u2019s report.<\/p>\n
Professor Calland mentioned that he does not \u201cbelieve that the evidence stacks up to the requirements of section 89\u201d which would require there to be a serious violation of the law as well as serious misconduct.<\/p>\n
He further argued that South Africans should welcome the president\u2019s decision to stay and fight legally, because were the impeachment process to reach parliament, it would undoubtedly turn into a \u201cmud slinging contest.\u201d 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.<\/p>\n
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 \u201creforming process in parliament\u201d \u201cThe country\u2019s best interests would be served by a continuation of his presidency,\u201d the professor stated, and mentioned that for all Ramaphosa\u2019s flaws, he holds a \u201cstabilising leadership\u201d position in the country.<\/p>\n
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 \u201cfrozen in time\u201d and \u201cfull of holes\u201d. Professor Calland feels that instead of the test of prima facie<\/em>, 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\u2019t have, and avoided \u201cillogical\u201d conclusions on the insufficient evidence that they did have.<\/p>\n Challenging the panel\u2019s 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 \u201cunfirm, insecure foundation.\u201d Effectively, the president is \u201cdoing the right thing\u201d by taking on the responsibility of challenging the court instead of resigning and thus undermining the impeachment process.<\/p>\n 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 \u201cstronger than ever,\u201d despite the ANC losing its majority. \u201cWithin the ANC, there is great confidence in its leadership,\u201d the professor emphasized, and the party itself has become much more intent on fixing problems with \u201czero appetite for a change in leadership at this point.\u201d<\/p>\n