• Business
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • News
  • Sport
  • Tech
  • World
Newsy Today
news of today
Home - atm
Tag:

atm

News

EFF and ATM Join Forces to Block Ramaphosa Impeachment Bid

by Rachel Morgan News Editor June 14, 2026
written by Rachel Morgan News Editor

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM) have confirmed their intention to oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent application to interdict Parliament from proceeding with an impeachment inquiry. Ramaphosa filed the papers in the Western Cape High Court on Friday, seeking to halt the process until his separate review application regarding the Section 89 Independent Panel report is finalized.

Opposition to the Interdict

Political parties and legal analysts are lining up against the President’s request. The EFF stated that the application is a move to “delay accountability,” while spokesperson Sinawo Thambo affirmed the party would continue to defend the Constitutional Court’s directive that Parliament must establish an impeachment committee. Asherson Attorneys, representing the ATM, indicated they would argue that the application lacks genuine urgency and suggested that any urgency was “self-created.” ActionSA’s Lerato Ngobeni also rejected the bid, maintaining that the committee’s work must continue unless a court orders otherwise.

Did You Know? The Impeachment Committee, chaired by Makashule Gana, has scheduled its next meeting for June 24, a date that remains central to the President’s argument that hearings could begin before the court rules on his review application.

The President’s Legal Argument

In his court filings, President Ramaphosa argued that he faces “irreparable harm” if the impeachment inquiry proceeds while the validity of the Independent Panel report remains under legal review. He stated that his goal is not to prevent Parliament from exercising its constitutional powers, but to clarify whether those powers should be exercised while the legal basis for the process—the panel report—is being challenged. He noted that he requested a stay of proceedings from Speaker Thoko Didiza and Committee Chair Makashule Gana, but both declined, citing the committee’s independent authority to manage its own agenda.

The President’s Legal Argument
Expert Insight: This legal maneuver highlights a fundamental tension between executive accountability and parliamentary autonomy. While the President seeks to pause proceedings to protect his position against a report he deems invalid, legal analysts like Modidima Maanya point out that Parliament is under no legal obligation to halt its work simply because a report is under review. The burden rests on the President to prove to the court that the risk of harm outweighs the legislative body’s duty to hold him accountable.

What Happens Next

The court will now need to determine whether to grant the interim relief requested by the President. If the interdict is denied, the Impeachment Committee is expected to proceed with its work as directed by the Constitutional Court. If granted, the inquiry would be paused for an indefinite period while the review application is heard. Political analyst Sandile Swana noted that Parliament is currently guided by the Constitutional Court’s instruction to conduct the inquiry, and the panel report remains in effect until a court rules otherwise.

South Africa's highest court revives impeachment proceedings against Ramaphosa • FRANCE 24 English

Frequently Asked Questions

Why does President Ramaphosa want to interdict the impeachment inquiry?
He argues that he will suffer “irreparable harm” if the inquiry proceeds based on an Independent Panel report that he is currently challenging in court.

Frequently Asked Questions

How has Parliament responded to the request to stay the proceedings?
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza and the committee’s legal team informed the President that the committee determines its own agenda and that they would not accede to his request to halt preparations.

What is the position of the political parties involved?
The EFF, ATM, and ActionSA have all indicated they will oppose the interdict, arguing that Parliament must fulfill its constitutional duty to hold the President accountable.

How do you believe the balance between executive legal rights and parliamentary oversight should be maintained in this case?

June 14, 2026 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Didiza rejects motion of no confidence by ATM against Ramaphosa over Phala Phala inquiry

by Rachel Morgan News Editor May 20, 2026
written by Rachel Morgan News Editor

National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has declined a request from African Transformation Movement (ATM) leader Vuyo Zungula to table a motion of no confidence against President Cyril Ramaphosa. The request, which stemmed from the ongoing Phala Phala scandal, was rejected following similar efforts by the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party to invoke Section 102 of the Constitution.

Legal Grounds for the Decision

In her formal response, Speaker Didiza cited Assembly Rule 129(2), which requires the Speaker to prioritize motions of no confidence while consulting with the Chief Whip and the Leader of Government Business. She further noted that under Rule 129(3), such motions must comply with House rules, relevant laws, and directives from the Rules Committee.

View this post on Instagram about Constitutional Court, President Ramaphosa
From Instagram — related to Constitutional Court, President Ramaphosa

The Speaker determined that the motion’s grounds were already being addressed by the Assembly. This follows the Constitutional Court judgment in Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (2026) ZACC 17.

Didiza emphasized that the theft at the Phala Phala farm has already been referred to an impeachment committee for further inquiry. Under Rule 90, she stated that discussion of the matter should not be anticipated through other mechanisms while this process is underway.

Did You Know? The Phala Phala scandal involves the theft of $580,000 that was allegedly hidden inside a sofa at President Ramaphosa’s farm in Limpopo in February 2020.

Opposition Demands and Constitutional Rulings

The ATM and MK Party argued that recent events have undermined public trust in the president. The ATM specifically submitted a motion targeting both Ramaphosa and his Cabinet, claiming his continued tenure damages the integrity of the Office of the President.

The MK Party requested that any potential vote of no confidence be conducted via secret ballot to protect Members of Parliament from internal intimidation.

These requests followed a Constitutional Court ruling that found Parliament’s previous handling of the Phala Phala report was invalid and unconstitutional. The court overturned a December 2022 decision not to refer the matter to an impeachment committee and ruled that Assembly Rule 129I was unconstitutional.

Expert Insight: This situation highlights a complex procedural tension. While opposition parties are attempting to use motions of no confidence to force immediate accountability, the Speaker is relying on the strict sequence of parliamentary rules and the specific mandates of the Constitutional Court to channel the inquiry through a formal impeachment committee instead.

Current Status and Potential Next Steps

President Ramaphosa has denied any wrongdoing, describing the Section 89 Independent Panel report—chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo—as “flawed.” He has consistently rejected calls from opposition parties to resign.

Didiza rejects ATM's motion of no confidence

Moving forward, the President may seek to overturn the findings of the panel, as he has confirmed he will take the report on judicial review following legal advice. Meanwhile, Parliament is expected to establish the impeachment committee to conduct a full inquiry as ordered by the apex court.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why did Speaker Thoko Didiza decline the motion of no confidence?
She declined the submission because the grounds for the motion are already being handled by the Assembly via an impeachment committee, as directed by the Constitutional Court. She also cited Rule 90, which prevents the anticipation of a matter already under inquiry.

Frequently Asked Questions
Constitutional Court ruling

What did the Constitutional Court rule regarding the Phala Phala report?
The court ruled that Parliament’s handling of the report was unconstitutional and invalid, specifically overturning the December 2022 decision not to refer the report to an impeachment committee. It also declared Rule 129I of the Assembly’s rules to be unconstitutional.

What is President Ramaphosa’s legal strategy regarding the panel report?
President Ramaphosa intends to take the Section 89 Independent Panel report on judicial review after receiving advice from his legal team.

Do you believe parliamentary committees or motions of no confidence are the more effective tool for ensuring executive accountability?

May 20, 2026 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

MPs express fury over clearance of PPS officers amid IPID findings

by Rachel Morgan News Editor May 14, 2026
written by Rachel Morgan News Editor

Parliamentarians expressed outrage on Wednesday after two Presidential Protection Services (PPS) officers were cleared by internal South African Police Service (SAPS) disciplinary proceedings. This outcome occurred despite the Independent Police Investigative Directorate (IPID) making adverse findings against the officials.

The controversy centers on PPS head Major-General Wally Rhoode and Constable HH Rekhoto. Members of Parliament accused law enforcement agencies of conducting a cover-up and applying inconsistent standards for senior officers involved in the Phala Phala matter.

Investigation Findings and Allegations

The investigation began following a July 2022 complaint by ATM leader Vuyo Zungula. IPID acting head of investigations, Thuso Keefelakae, detailed allegations including the failure to report crimes under the SAPS Act and the Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (PRECCA), as well as kidnapping, assault, and torture.

View this post on Instagram about General Rhoode, Investigation Findings and Allegations
From Instagram — related to General Rhoode, Investigation Findings and Allegations

The IPID probe specifically found that Major-General Rhoode failed to report offenses to the then-national commissioner Khehla Sitole and did not ensure the registration of case dockets regarding theft and housebreaking at the Phala Phala farm.

the investigation revealed that Rhoode conducted interviews with suspects while Constable Rekhoto traveled to Cape Town to survey suspect addresses. These activities were identified as the alleged unlawful use of state resources.

Did You Know? The IPID investigation found that while Rhoode and former presidential advisor Bejani Chauke traveled to Namibia, the unlawfulness of the border crossing could not be conclusively established.

Conflict Over Disciplinary Outcomes

The IPID submitted recommendations for disciplinary action against Rhoode and Rekhoto in October 2023. However, SAPS conducted its own internal hearings and notified IPID of a “not guilty” outcome in May 2024.

SAPS officials maintained that the disciplinary tribunal was independent and that the organization complied with recommendations from the Public Protector, and IPID. Acting National Commissioner Puleng Dimpane asserted that no special treatment was given, stating that all members are subjected to hearings equally regardless of rank.

IPID acting head Hlengani Bila defended the decision to classify the Phala Phala report, arguing it was necessary to protect the integrity of parallel investigations.

Expert Insight: This situation highlights a critical tension between independent oversight bodies and internal police disciplinary mechanisms. When an external watchdog like IPID finds misconduct but internal tribunals clear the officers, it creates a perception of “bizarre standards” that may undermine public confidence in law enforcement accountability.

Political Fallout and Legal Status

The findings sparked sharp criticism from across the political spectrum. DA MP Diane Barnard-Kohler described the disciplinary process as involving “bizarre standards,” while ADCP leader Kenneth Meshoe suggested that a senior official’s failure to register a criminal act could be indicative of corruption.

MK Party MP David Skosana questioned the independence of the IPID and suggested the matter would be addressed during impeachment proceedings. Similarly, EFF MP Muzi Khoza raised concerns regarding the absence of meaningful consequences for the alleged misconduct.

Meanwhile, DPCI head Siphesihle Nkosi reported that while a prosecutor declined to prosecute corruption and money laundering charges, the housebreaking and theft case remains in court. A hearing is expected later this month, with extradition requests lodged for two outstanding foreign suspects.

Potential Next Steps

Given the expressed dissatisfaction of parliamentarians, there may be further calls for transparency regarding the classified IPID report. The ongoing court case regarding housebreaking and theft could provide new evidence that may influence the narrative surrounding the officers’ conduct.

Depending on the outcome of the upcoming court hearing, there is a possibility that the impeachment process mentioned by some MPs could further scrutinize the “shenanigans and cover-ups” alleged by political critics.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which officers were cleared despite IPID’s findings?

Major-General Wally Rhoode, the head of the Presidential Protection Services, and Constable HH Rekhoto were cleared by SAPS internal disciplinary proceedings.

What specific misconduct did the IPID find regarding Major-General Rhoode?

The IPID found that Rhoode failed to report offenses to the then-national commissioner and failed to ensure that case dockets for housebreaking and theft at the Phala Phala farm were registered.

What is the current status of the criminal cases related to the Phala Phala farm?

The investigation into corruption and money laundering was finalized with a decision not to prosecute. However, the housebreaking and theft case is currently in court and is due to be heard later this month.

Do you believe internal police tribunals are the appropriate venue for judging senior officials in high-profile cases?

May 14, 2026 0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail

Recent Posts

  • Is Zone 2 Training Misleading? The Truth About Heart Rate Zones

    June 14, 2026
  • Limited Edition: Exclusive Availability and Where to Find It

    June 14, 2026
  • 3 Philadelphia Officers Shot in Wynnefield Expected to Recover; Suspect Dead

    June 14, 2026
  • Prof. Michał Garapich: Belfast Riots Were a Pogrom

    June 14, 2026
  • Masked Men Set Fire to Belfast Homes

    June 14, 2026

Popular Posts

  • 1

    Maya Jama flaunts her taut midriff in a white crop top and denim jeans during holiday as she shares New York pub crawl story

    April 5, 2025
  • 2

    Saar-Unternehmen hoffen auf tiefgreifende Reformen

    March 26, 2025
  • 3

    Marta Daddato: vita e racconti tra YouTube e podcast

    April 7, 2025
  • 4

    Unlocking Success: Why the FPÖ Could Outperform Projections and Transform Austria’s Political Landscape

    April 26, 2025
  • 5

    Mecimapro Apologizes for DAY6 Concert Chaos: Understanding the Controversy

    May 6, 2025

Follow Me

Follow Me
  • Cookie Policy
  • CORRECTIONS POLICY
  • PRIVACY POLICY
  • TERMS OF SERVICE

Hosted by Byohosting – Most Recommended Web Hosting – for complains, abuse, advertising contact: o f f i c e @byohosting.com


Back To Top
Newsy Today
  • Business
  • Entertainment
  • Health
  • News
  • Sport
  • Tech
  • World