The National Assembly would determine the fate of President Cyril Ramaphosa if he were to face a Section 89 inquiry. Ramaphosa would only face such an inquiry if the Section 89 panel of experts recommended that he did so on constitutional grounds.
If the panel were to find Ramaphosa with a case to answer and the Assembly was to endorse its recommendation, a committee would be established to conduct a Section 89 inquiry.
It has been a week since Ramaphosa submitted his response to the information that the African Transformation Movement (ATM), Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and United Democratic Movement (UDM) have submitted to the panel.
Phala Phala Saga | President Ramaphosa makes submission to panel of experts: Sysman Motloung
The information relates to the alleged theft of millions of US Dollars from his Phala Phala farm in Limpopo nearly three years ago.
In terms of Rule 129 (O), the committee must report back to the National Assembly with findings, recommendations and reasons for such findings and recommendations.
The rule dictates that the report must be scheduled for consideration and debate by the Assembly with due urgency.
Should the Section 89 Committee recommend the removal of a president from office, it would require at least a two-thirds majority vote to remove the President with immediate effect, as stated in the Rule.
This means at least 266 to 267 of the 400 members of the Assembly should vote in favour of the Committee’s recommendation to remove a president from office.
Forensic consultant Paul O’Sullivan responds to his alleged involvement in the Phala Phala farm robbery saga:
