Political parties represented on the Parliament's Impeachment Committee have sparred over whether President Cyril Ramaphosa should be compelled to give oral evidence to the Section 89 inquiry.
While the MK Party is of the view the inquiry should start with his testimony, the ANC wants the committee first to consider the reports of other institutions which have probed the Phala Phala matter, to determine whether there is even a need for what it’s termed a “full-blown inquiry”.
Debating the terms of reference for the inquiry at a meeting on Wednesday, the Patriotic Alliance came to Ramaphosa’s defence, saying he could not be compelled to appear.
The MK Party's John Hlophe said President Ramaphosa should be setting the stage for his impeachment inquiry by giving testimony first.
Failing to deliver evidence, Hlophe said, would invoke the rule of law to draw adverse inferences from the omissions.
"The information is peculiarly within the knowledge of the president, so he doesn’t have choice with respect."
The Patriotic Alliance's Marlon Daniels, however, thought otherwise.
"The president can’t be compelled to testify. His participation is a right to be heard, not a duty to give evidence."
The EFF's Omphile Maotwe said the committee was wasting time debating a matter that had already been traversed in court related to the impeachment inquiry of former Public Protector Busisiswe Mkhwebane, that testimony could not be given by proxy.
Parties have agreed to lobby each other on the points of dispute within the draft terms of reference before a meeting
Wolmaransstad Link proud partner of Learners Classroom Wolmaransstad
To book a Learners Driver spot, contact them on: 072 303 1918 or visit them at: Rood Street NR 9 Wolmaransstad 2630
Updated: July 2026
#WolmaransstadLinkNews