National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has declined a request to table a motion of no confidence against President Cyril Ramaphosa by the ATM over the Phala Phala scandal.
Image: Zwelethemba Kostile / Parliament of RSA
National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has declined a request by African Transformation Movement (ATM) leader Vuyo Zungula to table a motion of no confidence against President Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala scandal.
The decision comes after both the ATM and the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party sought to invoke Section 102 of the Constitution following the Constitutional Court ruling that Parliament’s handling of the Phala Phala report was unconstitutional and invalid.
The apex court ordered that the Section 89 Independent Panel report be referred back to Parliament’s impeachment committee for a full parliamentary inquiry.
Didiza has since confirmed that Parliament will establish an impeachment committee to investigate the matter.
IOL News previously reported that Didiza had received letters from both the ATM and MK Party requesting that a motion of no confidence in Ramaphosa be scheduled.
The parties argued that the recent developments had undermined public trust in the president.
However, Didiza rejected the request.
In a letter responding to the motion, Didiza referred to Assembly Rule 129(2), which states that the Speaker must accord a motion of no confidence due priority and consult with the Leader of Government Business and the Chief Whip before scheduling it.
She also cited Rule 129(3), which requires that such a motion comply with all relevant laws, House rules and directives approved by the Rules Committee.
Didiza said the motion must also clearly state the grounds on which the proposed vote of no confidence is based.
“In keeping with Rule 129(3) and (4), I am declining this submission as the grounds contained in the motion are the subject matter the Assembly is already seized with, as directed in the judgment of the Constitutional Court in Economic Freedom Fighters and Another v Speaker of the National Assembly and Others (2026) ZACC 17,” Didiza said.
She added that the matter relating to the theft at Ramaphosa’s Phala Phala farm had already been referred to the impeachment committee for further inquiry in terms of Assembly rules.
“This process is currently underway and, in accordance with Rule 90, discussion of the matter and related issues should not be anticipated, albeit introduced through another mechanism,” she said.
The MK Party had also requested that any vote of no confidence be conducted by secret ballot to protect MPs from internal intimidation.
Meanwhile, the ATM submitted an accompanying motion of no confidence targeting both Ramaphosa and his Cabinet, arguing that the president’s continued tenure undermines the integrity of the Office of the President.
The developments come as Ramaphosa prepares to legally challenge the Section 89 Independent Panel report into the Phala Phala scandal.
Ramaphosa recently confirmed that, following advice from his legal team, he would take the report on judicial review.
The panel, chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, found that Ramaphosa had questions to answer regarding the theft of $580,000 allegedly hidden in a sofa at his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo in February 2020.
The Constitutional Court also overturned the National Assembly’s December 2022 decision not to refer the Section 89 panel report to an impeachment committee, ruling that Rule 129I of the Assembly’s rules was unconstitutional and invalid.
Ramaphosa has denied any wrongdoing in relation to the Phala Phala saga, maintaining that the panel’s report was “flawed.”
He has also rejected calls from opposition parties to resign.
simon.majadibodu@iol.co.za
IOL Politics