The Western Cape High Court has temporarily halted public impeachment proceedings against South African President Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala farm scandal involving $580,000 in foreign currency allegedly concealed inside a sofa before it was stolen.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/ELLAN.png")
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/2026-Summer-IDRI-Masterclass.jpg")
Judge André le Grange granted Ramaphosa’s urgent application on Friday, July 24, 2026, restraining Parliament from proceeding with public impeachment hearings and the taking of oral testimony until the court determines his separate application challenging the report upon which the proceedings are based.
The ruling does not completely stop the parliamentary committee from functioning. Parliament said the Section 89 Impeachment Committee would continue its preparatory work, including finalising its terms of reference and recommending the appointment of an evidence leader. The committee is scheduled to meet again on Wednesday, July 29.
Ramaphosa approached the court after Parliament established the multiparty committee to investigate whether he committed serious constitutional violations or misconduct in connection with the theft of foreign currency from his private Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo Province in 2020.
The impeachment process is based on the November 2022 report of an independent panel headed by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo. The panel found that Ramaphosa had a prima facie case to answer and may have committed serious violations of the Constitution and the law or serious misconduct over his handling of the incident.
Ramaphosa is seeking to have the panel’s findings reviewed and set aside, arguing that they were irrational, unsupported by the available evidence and affected by material errors. His substantive challenge is expected to be heard in early September.
The scandal began after a large amount of foreign currency was stolen from Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala wildlife farm in February 2020. The president subsequently confirmed that $580,000 had been stolen but maintained that the money represented legitimate proceeds from the sale of 20 buffaloes to a foreign buyer.
Questions were raised about why the money was kept inside furniture at the farm, whether the foreign currency had been properly declared and why the theft was allegedly not immediately reported through regular police channels.
The controversy became public in June 2022 after former South African intelligence chief Arthur Fraser filed a criminal complaint accusing Ramaphosa of concealing the theft and using members of his presidential protection unit to investigate the incident and recover the stolen money.
Fraser alleged that about $4 million was stolen from the farm, an amount Ramaphosa disputed. The president has consistently denied allegations of money laundering, kidnapping, corruption or abuse of office arising from the incident.
South Africa’s National Prosecuting Authority announced in 2024 that it would not prosecute Ramaphosa over the matter after concluding that the available evidence was insufficient to support a successful criminal case. However, the decision did not end the parliamentary and constitutional questions surrounding the president’s conduct.
In December 2022, the National Assembly, where Ramaphosa’s African National Congress then held a majority, voted by 214 votes to 148 against adopting the independent panel’s report, effectively preventing the commencement of a full impeachment investigation.
The Economic Freedom Fighters and the African Transformation Movement subsequently challenged that decision before the Constitutional Court.
On May 8, 2026, the Constitutional Court held that Parliament had acted unlawfully by terminating the accountability process before the allegations and available evidence had been fully investigated. The court directed that the independent panel’s report be referred to an impeachment committee for consideration under the National Assembly’s rules.
Following the judgment, Parliament constituted the Section 89 Impeachment Committee, comprising representatives of the political parties in the National Assembly, and began preparations for public hearings.
Ramaphosa then filed the urgent application seeking to stop the committee from proceeding until his legal challenge against the independent panel’s report had been determined.
Opposition parties, including the EFF, uMkhonto weSizwe Party and African Transformation Movement, opposed his application, arguing that suspending the proceedings would further delay parliamentary accountability and undermine the Constitutional Court’s judgment.
Ramaphosa maintained that allowing public hearings to proceed on the strength of a report he considered legally defective could cause him irreparable reputational and political harm, particularly if the report was subsequently overturned.
Following Friday’s ruling, the Presidency said Ramaphosa respected judicial independence and the constitutional separation of powers. It added that he would continue to cooperate with and abide by lawful accountability processes. (The Presidency)
Parliament initially said its Speaker would study the judgment and its implications. The impeachment committee later clarified that the order only prevented it from holding public hearings and receiving oral evidence while allowing administrative and preparatory work to continue.
Committee Chairman Makashule Gana said the committee would proceed with its July 29 meeting to finalise its operational terms and consider the appointment of an evidence leader.
The Democratic Alliance, a major partner in South Africa’s coalition government, called for Ramaphosa’s challenge to the panel report to be resolved urgently, arguing that South Africans were entitled to answers and consistent standards of accountability for all public officeholders.
The temporary order does not determine whether Ramaphosa committed any constitutional violation or misconduct. It merely pauses the public phase of the impeachment inquiry until the court decides whether the independent panel’s report should remain the foundation of the proceedings.
Should the review application fail, Parliament may resume the public hearings and receive evidence concerning the source and storage of the foreign currency, the reporting of the robbery and the actions allegedly taken to identify and apprehend those responsible.
The committee could ultimately recommend that the National Assembly consider removing Ramaphosa from office, although such a decision would require the constitutionally prescribed parliamentary support. The proceedings, if resumed, would represent an unprecedented impeachment inquiry against a sitting South African president.
Get up to 20% off selected LAWBREED Supreme Court Reports, plus access to My S.C Extra, featuring Supreme Court judgments from 1972 to date. Call/WhatsApp: 08077011741 | 08077011755 | 08077011730 | 08023269613 Email: orders@lawbreed.com | mails@lawbreed.com
LAWBREED — Equipping You For Greater Success!
______________________________________________________________________
“Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
The book also examines Nigeria's legal ecosystem, focusing on the LPELR and NBA AI Guidelines. As a bonus, every purchase comes with a FREE eBook titled: How to Use the AI Features in LegalPedia and LawPavilion.
Ohio Books Ltd praises the publication, stating:
"....this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic."
How to Order:
📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878
📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com
🌎 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access it directly online at https://selar.com/prv626
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe Esq., ACIarb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director at the Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
_______________________________________________________________________
“Order Justice Omolaye-Ajileye’s Electronic Evidence Books Now” — Essential Guides On Evidence Act, Case Law And Digital Proof
