Neelam Rahim | neelam@radioislam.co.za
3-minute read
22 July 2025 | 15:30 CAT

📸 Tensions rise as President Cyril Ramaphosa, former President Jacob Zuma, and suspended Police Minister Senzo Mchunu take centre stage in a looming legal battle over constitutional powers and political accountability. Image credits: Daily Sun

A legal showdown is brewing at the Constitutional Court as Jacob Zuma’s MK Party challenges President Cyril Ramaphosa’s decision to suspend Police Minister Senzo Mchunu and appoint law professor Feroz Kachalia as acting minister, all while launching a judicial commission of inquiry.

The matter, described by Legal Analyst Mpumelelo Zikalala as unprecedented, raises sharp constitutional and procedural questions. At the heart of the dispute is whether the president acted lawfully by keeping Mchunu on special leave with all the benefits of office, while simultaneously appointing another minister to act in his place.

“The Constitutional Court is the apex court,” explained Zikalala in an interview with Radio Islam International. “It has jurisdiction in matters of great public importance or where bypassing lower courts avoids wasting time.”

Zikalala pointed to the MK Party’s core argument: “The president is not allowed to put a minister on special leave and then employ an acting minister while that minister still continues to enjoy the perks.” On the other hand, Ramaphosa’s supporters argue that “the president has unilateral decision-making powers when it comes to hiring and firing members of his cabinet.”

But this situation is far from straightforward. Zikalala notes, “There’s no precedent for this. It’s a first for the courts.” The critical issue, he says, lies in the rationality of having “two ministers being paid and serving in the same position. Why not reassign the suspended minister or remove him entirely?”

He emphasized that presidential decisions must meet three key criteria: “They must be lawful, rational, and procedurally fair.” A failure in any of these opens the door for judicial intervention.

The court has already indicated urgency in the matter. “An interim ruling (Part A) may be issued by the first or second week of August,” Zikalala said. However, the full hearing (Part B) could stretch toward the end of the year.

While the Constitutional Court has not yet committed to hearing the case in full, its willingness to consider arguments signals that “there are merits in the matter,” added Zikalala.

Listen to the full interview on Sabahul Muslim with Moulana Sulaimaan Ravat and Legal Analyst Mpumelelo Zikalala.