The African Transformation Movement (ATM) announced it will petition the Constitutional Court for clarification after the Western Cape High Court granted President Cyril Ramaphosa’s urgent application to interdict Parliament’s Impeachment Committee in July 2026, pending the President’s challenge of the Section 89 Independent Panel report on the Phala Phala farm matter. The ATM maintains this High Court ruling raises constitutional concerns, given that the Constitutional Court had previously instructed Parliament to establish an impeachment committee in May 2026 following questions about President Ramaphosa’s conduct.

ATM’s Legal Concerns Over Court Rulings

ATM spokesperson Zama Ntshona said the party seeks the Constitutional Court’s guidance on whether a lower court can temporarily suspend the implementation of an order from the highest court in the country. “It is therefore imperative that the Constitutional Court clarifies whether the implementation of its own order can be suspended by a lower court,” Ntshona stated, according to a media briefing in July 2026. This legal question centres on the balance of parliamentary accountability and judicial intervention, which now stands at the heart of the ongoing Phala Phala impeachment debate.

ATM MP Vuyo Zungula, also speaking following the High Court ruling, argued that the decision complicates the oversight mandate of Parliament. “It’s unprecedented, you know, it places Parliament and our democratic institutions at a very, very difficult position because what it effectively means is each and every president that is held accountable via the Section 89 process can easily go to court and want to stop Parliament from doing what Parliament constitutionally is obligated to do.”

Timeline Of The Parliamentary-Legal Dispute

The dispute over President Ramaphosa’s potential impeachment originated in December 2022, when the National Assembly voted against referring the Section 89 Independent Panel report to an impeachment committee. In May 2026, the Constitutional Court ruled this decision unconstitutional and directed Parliament to establish the committee. In July 2026, the Western Cape High Court granted Ramaphosa’s application to interdict the committee, citing his pending review of the panel’s conclusions that he may have a case to answer over the Phala Phala theft. Later that month, ATM announced its intention to seek a Constitutional Court intervention.

The ATM’s challenge may set a precedent for the interpretation of the separation of powers in South Africa, as well as define the limits of judicial review in parliamentary affairs. The Constitutional Court is yet to announce the hearing date for ATM’s application.