“I Will Not Resign”: Ramaphosa Defies Phala Phala Pressure, Heads to Court for Review

"I will not resign. I did not steal public money." – President Cyril Ramaphosa on Phala Phala. “To resign would give credence to a flawed report” – Ramaphosa addresses the nation.

The Azanian | Politics

By Mpho Dube, Editor in Chief of The Azanian  

President Cyril Ramaphosa went on national television on Monday, 11 May, and drew a line in the sand over Phala Phala. He will not resign. He will take the Section 89 panel report to court on review, and he will challenge the findings that say he may have a case to answer over the theft of $580,000 from a couch at his Limpopo farm.

Speaking in a televised address, Ramaphosa said resigning now would “give credence to a report which has grievous flaws” and would hand a victory to those seeking to reverse the renewal of the country.

The statement was aimed directly at his detractors, including EFF leader Julius Malema and other opposition parties who have renewed calls for him to step down since the Constitutional Court ruled on 8 May that the panel’s report must be tabled in Parliament for processing by an impeachment committee.

“I accept the Constitutional Court’s ruling,” Ramaphosa said. “I have reflected on what the judgment means for the country, for the rule of law and for the office I occupy. I am mindful of the severe difficulties the country is confronted with.”

But he also made clear that accepting the ruling does not mean accepting the report’s conclusions. He argued that the panel relied on hearsay evidence and that he had reserved his right to seek a review should circumstances change. 

Ramaphosa said he had “consistently maintained that I have not stolen public money nor committed any crime.” He added that he had cooperated with all processes and would continue to do so.

His legal team will now seek to have the report set aside on the grounds of misconception of mandate and grave errors of law. Experts say the review could take up to a year, though the president will push for it to be heard on an expeditious basis.

The Constitutional Court’s decision means the impeachment process can run in parallel. Parliament’s impeachment committee can continue its work even while the review is before the courts. That creates a dual track: a legal challenge in the judiciary and a political process in the National Assembly.

For Ramaphosa, the review is an attempt to remove the legal and reputational weight of the report before it reaches the stage of a parliamentary vote on impeachment.

His defiance sets up a prolonged confrontation with the opposition. The EFF and ATM, which brought the original case, have argued that Parliament failed its constitutional duty in 2022 when it rejected the panel’s findings.

The Constitutional Court agreed, setting aside that vote and ordering the matter back to Parliament. Malema and others have seized on the ruling as vindication and have intensified pressure for Ramaphosa to step aside while the process unfolds.

Ramaphosa rejected that logic. To resign now, he said, would be to validate a flawed process and to surrender to those who want to derail the ANC’s renewal project. He spent the weekend reflecting on the judgment and concluded that the Constitution provides for the right to review an adverse report, and that he intends to use it.

The president and his legal team face practical hurdles. Under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, review proceedings must be lodged within 180 days. Securing an expedited hearing will require convincing the courts that the matter is urgent enough to bypass normal queues.

The Constitutional Court had already denied him direct access once when he tried to challenge the panel’s findings in 2022, before the National Assembly rejected the report and he let the matter lapse.

The political environment has shifted since then. The report now has the backing of the Constitutional Court, and new claims have emerged in the media about the scale of the cash stolen at Phala Phala. News24 reported that the amount may have been closer to R15 million rather than the R10 million initially disclosed.

Former spy boss Arthur Fraser, who laid the criminal concealment charges against Ramaphosa, has also claimed he was offered R50 million to drop the case, according to reports in the Sunday World.

Against that backdrop, Ramaphosa’s message was one of resolve. He will not be forced out by political pressure. He will fight the report in court, cooperate with Parliament’s process, and leave the final judgment to the law. For his supporters, it is a stand for due process and against what they see as a politically motivated attempt to remove a sitting president. For his opponents, it is another delay in a saga that has dragged on since 2022.

The next months will test whether that strategy holds. If the review succeeds, the impeachment process collapses. If it fails, Ramaphosa will face the committee and a parliamentary vote with the report’s findings intact. Either way, he has made his position unambiguous: he is not going anywhere, and he will contest this in court.