Ramaphosa meets deadline
JOHANNESBURG - The Section 89 Independent Panel of experts is expected to officially start its assessment of whether President Cyril Ramaphosa has a case to answer on constitutional grounds from yesterday until November 17, 2022.
This comes as Ramaphosa has met the deadline to respond to all the submissions made by some National Assembly Members.
He was given 10 days from October 28 until Sunday, November 6, to respond to all the submitted information.
The panel is tasked to assess a draft motion by African Transformation Movement (ATM) calling for Ramaphosa’s removal from office.
ATM leader Vuyo Zungula invoked Section 89 (1) of the Constitution and National Assembly Rule 129 (A) to remove Ramaphosa from office on grounds of serious misconduct and serious violation of the law. This follows the alleged theft of millions of US Dollars at his farm at Phala Phlala in Limpopo more than two years ago. Ramaphosa allegedly concealed the theft.
Conclude
The three-member panel chaired by retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo has thirty days to conduct and conclude its assessment. It started on October 19 and only has 10 more days left to conclude its work.
Now that President Ramaphosa has met the deadline on Sunday, the next step for the panel is to consider all the information over the 10-day period starting yesterday to November 17.
During the assessment, the panel says it will conduct any additional research required. It will further deliberate on the facts, write and finalise its report within the 10-day period, before submitting the report to National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula within the 30-day period of its assessment.
The composition, appointment, functions and powers of the panel are outlined under National Assembly Rule 129.
The Rule was developed by the National Assembly Rules Committee in 2018 in response to a successful Constitutional Court bid by the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) versus former National Assembly Speaker Baleka Mbete on December 29, 2017.
The Constitutional Court ordered the National Assembly put removal procedures in place whenever a Member of the Assembly invokes Section 89 (1) of the Constitution to remove a president from office.