By Lehlohonolo Lehana.
The Western Cape High Court dismissed an application for leave to appeal the interim interdict that halted the Section 89 impeachment public hearings.
The ruling follows an application by the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party and the United Africans Transformation (UAT), seeking leave to appeal the judgement granting interim interdict.
In July, the high court had granted president Cyril Ramaphosa an interim interdict halting public hearings of Impeachment Committee pending his review application.
The interim order remains in place pending the outcome of review application, in which he is challtenging the findings of a Section 89 independent panel.
Ramaphosa is facing impeachment over events that followed the theft of $580,000 from his Phala Phala farm in 2020.
In dismissing the appeal application, Judge Matthew Francis said the earlier order was narrowly framed and did not prevent the impeachment committee from continuing with work that it was still permitted to undertake.
Francis stressed that the 24 July ruling did not completely restrain the committee, which is made up of 31 members of parliament from 16 political parties.
He also pointed out that the interim interdict would lapse once judgment is handed down in Ramaphosa’s review application, which is scheduled to be heard from 2 to 4 September.
“The committee’s terms of reference are not yet fulfilled and fall to be considered on 1 September 2026.”
“The president has objected to the proposed chief evidence leader, and a legal opinion has been sought. No assistant evidence leaders had been appointed.”
“Once the evidence leader briefs the committee on the panel report, a call for evidence, statements, and witness lists will follow. No hearing under rule 129M is thus imminent,” the judgment reads.
Francis concluded that the threshold for granting leave to appeal had not been met.
The judge also took into account a recent Constitutional Court (ConCourt) decision involving the African Transformation Movement (ATM) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF).
On 12 August 2026, the ConCourt refused the political parties direct application for leave to appeal against the interim order.
Political Parties including the ATM, EFF, MK Party, and UAT launched urgent direct appeals to the Constitutional Court to set aside the interdict.
Francis said the ConCourt’s decision was relevant to the application before him, although it was not determinative.
“The basis on which the Constitutional Court declined to entertain the matter at that stage was the impending determination of the review and the likelihood that the interim order would thereby become moot.”
“The factual basis for that assessment has, if anything, become stronger. I treat the refusal as relevant, but not determinative, to the present enquiry.”
Ramaphosa is seeking to overturn a judicial panel’s finding that his handling of the theft of hundreds of thousands of dollars, hidden in a couch at his Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo province, was unlawful.
He contends that the process was flawed due to errors made by the advisory panel, which concluded that he may have committed serious violations related to the robbery at his wildlife farm.