The Constitutional Court judgment on Phala Phala stands as one of the clearest constitutional rebukes yet of how the ANC and President Cyril Ramaphosa have used parliamentary power to evade accountability.
It confirms what the EFF has argued from the beginning: that in 2022, the ANC converted parliament from an institution meant to hold the executive to account into a shield for presidential protection.
For years, the EFF resisted efforts to normalise one of the gravest scandals in democratic SA. We rejected the claim that millions in foreign currency hidden on the private property of a sitting president could be dismissed as a personal matter.
A president entrusted with protecting democratic institutions cannot credibly preside over concealed cash transactions while presenting himself as the face of ethical leadership.
The court vindicated the EFF’s insistence that parliament acted unlawfully when it blocked the Section 89 impeachment process against Ramaphosa.
“The ‘new dawn’ has collapsed, and with it, the myth of Ramaphosa’s ethical leadership.” — Julius Malema
In doing so, it made plain that the ANC abused its majority to shield him from constitutional scrutiny. The implications reach beyond Phala Phala. This judgment exposes a deeper collapse of constitutional morality within the ANC and shows how democratic institutions have been subordinated to the political survival of party leaders.
South Africans were promised a “new dawn” under Ramaphosa. What followed instead was a presidency clouded by concealed foreign cash, parliamentary manipulation and institutional cowardice. The promise of renewal gave way to constitutional evasion and executive arrogance.
At the centre of this crisis is a president who has survived politically not through exoneration but through the shielding of corruption while ordinary South Africans endure collapsing municipalities, worsening unemployment, rising food and fuel prices, economic stagnation, and poor service delivery.
The tragedy is that accountability has operated differently depending on who stands accused. Ordinary citizens experience the full force of the law without compromise or political protection.
The EFF will never tolerate a system that oppresses our people while protecting the political elite, for no constitutional democracy can survive under a two-tier system of accountability.
On Monday, Ramaphosa once again demonstrated the arrogance that has come to define both his presidency and the ANC’s relationship with constitutional accountability.
Instead of confronting the Constitutional Court judgment with humility and honesty, he announced that he would not resign. He took no meaningful questions because his presidency survives through carefully staged appearances and protection from genuine scrutiny.
A president secure in his moral legitimacy would subject himself openly to democratic accountability, yet Ramaphosa addressed the country in isolation while the media remained locked outside the Union Buildings.
Ramaphosa wants to continue hiding behind legal technicalities and review processes while insisting he will remain president regardless of the profound constitutional crisis surrounding his office. The EFF will not be intimidated and will continue to pursue this matter in parliament.
The greatest threat facing SA today is not merely Ramaphosa’s conduct as an individual, but the ANC’s growing belief that electoral dominance entitles it to undermine constitutional governance itself.
Parliament has increasingly become a political insurance policy for compromised leaders rather than an institution that safeguards the people against executive abuse of power.
Phala Phala will be remembered as the moment when the carefully manufactured mythology of Ramaphosa’s ethical presidency collapsed.
The image of a constitutional reformer has been replaced by the reality of a leader shielded by parliament, protected by elites, and delayed in accountability.
Even now, Ramaphosa behaves as though SA cannot survive without him, forgetting that no individual is greater than the constitution and no president is entitled to govern indefinitely while public trust collapses.
The EFF remains the only consistent political force in SA that has refused to compromise in the struggle against corruption, abuse of power, and constitutional delinquency. While others retreated into silence or negotiated comfort through the government of national unity (GNU), the EFF remained unwavering in defence of accountability and constitutional justice.
When parliament abandoned its constitutional obligations and the ANC weaponised its majority to shield executive power, it was the EFF that stood firm in defence of constitutional accountability.
The Constitutional Court has now exposed the ANC’s manipulation of parliament and shattered the illusion that Ramaphosa’s presidency rests on moral legitimacy.
What remains is a president clinging to power through delay, procedural evasion, and arrogance, while the democratic credibility of the state deteriorates. The “new dawn” has collapsed, and with it, the myth of Ramaphosa’s ethical leadership.
Parliament must now be allowed to confront the Constitutional Court judgment. The EFF will continue to fight for justice from the picket lines to the courts and from the benches of parliament itself.
The issue facing both parliament and the GNU partners is whether they will stand on the side of constitutional accountability or continue shielding Ramaphosa from the consequences of his actions, decisions and sustained contempt for democratic responsibility.
- Malema is the president of the EFF.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.