Madonsela hits back at Ramaphosa’s challenge to his impeachment role

Thandazani Madonsela SC says he disclosed all potentially relevant facts before his appointment as evidence leader for the Section 89 impeachment enquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa over the Phala Phala matter.

Madonsela was responding to submissions made by Ramaphosa on Tuesday which asked that Madonsela’s appointment not be confirmed because he allegedly did not meet the committee’s requirement that the evidence leader should have no real or perceived conflict of interest.

The impeachment committee resolved on August 5 to appoint Madonsela as evidence leader.

In his response, contained in a letter to Parliament on Wednesday, Madonsela said every fact the president raised was disclosed by him in writing to parliament’s senior parliamentary legal adviser on July 27 and was before the committee when it voted.

Madonsela said the committee had already considered the conflict of interest criterion and determined that prior unrelated legal work for or against political parties or the president did not, by itself, constitute a conflict.

“In my understanding, the evidence leader is not an adjudicator. He decides nothing. The recusal principles on which the president’s letter is modelled are apposite.”

Madonsela said he had disclosed prior designation to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and a brief advisory role for a parliamentary study group, both of which were deemed not to create a conflict.

Madonsela said Ramaphosa’s letter proceeded on the basis that he would assume a “decision-making or quasi-adjudicative role”.

“This is not my understanding. Under Rule 129M, the committee must establish the veracity and, where required, the seriousness of the allegation and report to the Assembly.”

Madonsela said questions before the committee were decided by its members. The assembly alone decided whether the president is to be removed, and only by a two-thirds majority.

“The chief evidence leader has no vote, makes no finding and recommends nothing.“

Madonsela said the evidence leader assists the committee, on its instructions, to identify and place before it the evidence relevant to the allegations, in the hearings at which the president, assisted by legal representatives of his choice, may test that evidence and answer it.

“In the view I take of the matter, the recusal principles governing adjudicators therefore do not apply.”

Madonsela said the president’s claim that he may harbor a grievance due to his replacement as JSC designee was not supported by facts or the record.