The Constitutional Court is expected to hand down a landmark judgment on the Economic Freedom Fighters’ challenge to Parliament’s handling of the Phala Phala matter, a case that continues to cast a long political and legal shadow over President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration.

At the heart of the dispute is Parliament’s 2022 decision to reject a Section 89 panel report, which had found that there was prima facie evidence suggesting possible constitutional breaches linked to the handling of a 2020 theft of foreign currency from Ramaphosa’s Limpopo game farm.

The incident first came to public attention in 2022 after former State Security Agency director-general Arthur Fraser laid criminal charges, alleging that large sums of undeclared foreign currency were stolen from the property and that the matter was not reported through official policing channels. The allegations triggered immediate political fallout and intensified scrutiny of the President’s conduct.

In response, Parliament established an independent panel chaired by retired Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo. While the panel did not determine guilt, it concluded that there was sufficient preliminary evidence to warrant further constitutional consideration, particularly regarding transparency and potential breaches of the Executive Ethics Code.

However, Parliament ultimately voted not to adopt the report, effectively halting impeachment proceedings. That decision is now being contested by the EFF, which argues that Parliament failed to properly exercise its constitutional obligations in assessing the panel’s findings.

Multiple state institutions have since weighed in. The National Prosecuting Authority declined to pursue charges, citing insufficient evidence, while the South African Revenue Service found no indication of tax evasion. The Public Protector also cleared Ramaphosa of ethical misconduct, though critics have questioned the depth of those findings.

The Constitutional Court’s ruling will not revisit the criminal allegations themselves, but will instead focus on whether Parliament acted lawfully and reasonably in its oversight role. The outcome is expected to set an important precedent for how impeachment processes are handled and how far legislative bodies must go in acting on independent investigative findings.