President Cyril Ramaphosa has moved to challenge the appointment of senior advocate Thandazani Griffiths Madonsela as the chief evidence leader in Parliament’s Section 89 impeachment inquiry.
In submissions to National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza, Parliament secretary Xolile George and Impeachment Committee chairperson Makashule Gana, Ramaphosa raised concerns about Madonsela’s suitability for the position, citing what he described as actual and perceived conflicts of interest.
“On the information presently available, therefore, it seems to me that the appointment of Adv. Madonsela SC will violate the above principles. Therefore, I submit that his appointment should not be confirmed,” Ramaphosa said.
Concerns over previous relationship
One of Ramaphosa’s objections relates to Madonsela’s previous appointment to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).
The president said he had appointed Madonsela to the JSC but later removed him following the 2022 interviews for the position of Chief Justice.
Ramaphosa believes the history could create a perception that Madonsela may harbour a grievance against him.
“In these circumstances, there is a reasonable apprehension that Adv. Madonsela SC may harbour a sense of grievance towards me and that he may act upon it,” the president said.
Questions over ANC legal work
Ramaphosa’s second concern centres on Madonsela’s previous legal work for the African National Congress, particularly matters connected to the Section 89 process.
ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula previously disclosed that Madonsela had provided legal advice to the party on issues relating to the impeachment process.
Madonsela was briefed by ANC attorneys in June and July on legal questions surrounding the Section 89 inquiry and its rules. He also co-authored a legal opinion for the ANC Parliamentary Caucus concerning whether MPs serving on the impeachment committee could be subjected to a “fit and proper” requirement.
Ramaphosa said it was unclear how much information Madonsela had received from the ANC and what advice he had provided. He argued that the previous attorney-client relationship raised questions about whether Madonsela could now perform his role with the required independence.
The president further argued that legal practitioners are generally expected to avoid taking on matters substantially connected to previous work for former clients, particularly where confidential or privileged information may have been obtained.
He said the principle should be applied even more strictly where someone is being considered for a role involving decision-making or quasi-judicial responsibilities.
Madonsela recommended for key role
The dispute follows the Section 89 Impeachment Committee’s decision on August 5 to recommend Madonsela as evidence leader.
ANC representatives on the committee abstained from the vote. The party subsequently placed Madonsela’s previous legal work for the ANC on record, while indicating that it had no objection to his appointment.
Ramaphosa warned that Madonsela could potentially enter the inquiry with information obtained through his previous work for the ANC that would not be available to another evidence leader without those prior ties.
The Impeachment Committee is now considering Ramaphosa’s objections, with discussions on his submissions under way.
