No good options for Ramaphosa
South Africa holds its breath as ANC and alliance partners try to figure out what on Earth to do about the
President Cyril Ramaphosa and the governing ANC are in the dwang over the recommended presidential impeachment amid the fluid political and constitutional complications that reached into both Luthuli House and the Union Buildings. None of the options looked good, not for anyone. And certainly not for South Africa, now caught up in its third presidential game of musical chairs in 14 years.
On Thursday evening Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, said the President was still consulting within the ANC, with the tripartite alliance and with other stakeholders, given the enormity of the matter.
“Whatever decision the President makes, that decision has to be informed by the best interest of the country. That decision cannot be rushed.”
Throughout the afternoon, speculation ran hot and heavy that Ramaphosa was being advised to legally challenge the impeachment recommendation to Parliament from the Section 89 independent assessment panel; that he was advised not to resign but rather use all wiggle room possible. Then Thursday evening’s ANC National Executive Committee (NEC) virtual meeting was delayed to the next day to allow it to be held in person.
The only certainty on Friday morning was that on Tuesday, 6 December the National Assembly was scheduled to debate and vote on the Section 89 assessment panel’s recommendation of impeachment proceedings against Ramaphosa over serious violations of the Constitution. These included violations of Section 96, including paid outside work and exposure to conflicts of interest, alongside contravening the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act.
A parliamentary debate would be followed by a vote – possibly by secret ballot or an open roll call – in a decision to be taken on the day.
The question for Tuesday’s vote will be whether MPs agree with the panel recommendation. If not, that’s the end of the matter. If yes, a parliamentary impeachment committee will start proceedings.
No other motions or steps are needed as such an impeachment committee is provided for by the rules of Parliament, and merely needs political parties to nominate its members, the National Assembly programming committee has been told.
That impeachment committee would ultimately have to make a decision after, among other things, public hearings that could include Ramaphosa as a witness. If it decided against removing the President, that would be the end of it.
If it decided in favour of
Ramaphosa’s impeachment, that decision would go to the National Assembly, where it would need a twothirds majority to succeed. Though some of the President’s advisers may well have proposed he brazen it out, all this will go away if Ramaphosa resigns – and on Tuesday the House would have nothing to debate and vote on.
But also gone then would be any opportunity for him to re-establish his anticorruption, pro-Constitution credentials. And that may not be palatable to the politician who built his presidency on fighting corruption, achieving a social compact and kicking economic growth into higher, sustainable gear. Ramaphosa seems to have been caught off-guard by the impeachment recommendation – possibly because of his side’s political spin for exoneration
– and maintained he had done
nothing wrong.
“I have endeavoured, throughout my tenure as President, not only to abide by my oath, but to set an example of respect for the Constitution, for its institutions, for due process and the law.”
This moment has been described as “unprecedented and extraordinary” in South Africa’s constitutional democracy.