Ramaphosa Could Be Summoned to Testify in Phala Phala Probe, Parliament Legal Opinion Finds
- Parliament's legal advisers warned that President Ramaphosa may not be able to avoid testifying in the Phala Phala impeachment inquiry
- A legal opinion argued that the right to remain silent applies to criminal proceedings and does not extend to parliamentary inquiries
- The inquiry remains on hold after the Western Cape High Court interdicted the committee from hearing oral testimony
PAY ATTENTION: Mark Briefly News as a preferred source, and our content will appear higher in your Google feed!
Source: Getty Images
SOUTH AFRICA — Parliament's legal advisers have concluded that President Cyril Ramaphosa could be compelled to testify before the Phala Phala impeachment inquiry, should he decline to appear voluntarily.
The finding is contained in a legal opinion prepared for Parliament's Section 89 Committee, which is examining allegations of misconduct against the president related to the storage and subsequent theft of foreign currency at his Phala Phala game farm.
Ramaphosa has no right to silence, lawyers say
The legal unit argued that a head of state facing serious allegations of constitutional or legal violations cannot invoke the right to remain silent during an impeachment process. Drawing on previous court rulings, the opinion clarified that this right is confined to criminal proceedings and does not extend to civil matters or parliamentary inquiries.
PAY ATTENTION: You can now search for all your favourite news and topics on Briefly News.
Under the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, read alongside National Assembly rules, Ramaphosa holds no special exemption from being called as a witness.
"On a plain reading of these provisions, he falls within the ordinary category of 'any person' capable of being summonsed, in the same manner as any other witness," the opinion stated.
Parliament's lawyers further advised that a witness who has been lawfully summonsed cannot refuse to answer questions on the grounds that their responses may be self-incriminating.
Committee advised on sequence of testimony
The legal opinion also weighed in on a debate among members of Parliament regarding the order in which testimony should be heard. Some MPs had proposed that Ramaphosa testify first, to help define the scope of the inquiry. Parliament's legal unit rejected this approach, recommending instead that the president only be called to respond once the committee has gathered and fully assessed the supporting evidence against him.
Inquiry suspended pending court ruling
Despite the legal opinion, the impeachment inquiry is currently suspended. The Western Cape High Court has interdicted the Section 89 Committee from proceeding with oral testimony while it considers a legal challenge to the validity of the impeachment report that triggered the inquiry. The court has not yet issued a final ruling on the matter.
Phala Phala committee meets despite Western Cape High Court ruling
Briefly News reported that the parliamentary committee overseeing President Cyril Ramaphosa's Section 89 Impeachment Inquiry will press ahead with its scheduled meeting on Wednesday, 29 July 2026, despite a court order blocking it from conducting public hearings. The Western Cape High Court issued an interim interdict in favour of Ramaphosa, preventing the inquiry from holding public sessions or taking oral evidence. A review is scheduled to be heard in early September 2026.
PAY ATTENTION: Follow Briefly News on Twitter and never miss the hottest topics! Find us at @brieflyza!
Source: Briefly News
