National Assembly Speaker Thoko Didiza has admitted she received legal advice telling her to oppose President Cyril Ramaphosa's court bid to freeze the Phala Phala impeachment inquiry -- and chose not to follow it.
Speaking on The Clement Manyathela Show on Monday, Didiza said she obtained two legal opinions on Ramaphosa's urgent interdict application. One told her to oppose. The other was the opinion obtained by the Impeachment Committee, a separate party in the matter. She said she was guided by the advice not to oppose, and filed a notice to abide by the court's decision instead.
Didiza has not disclosed the full content of either opinion, and neither has been made public.
The Impeachment Committee itself, chaired by Makashule Gana, took the opposite position and filed papers opposing the application. The interdict hearing is set for 15 and 16 July 2026 in the Western Cape High Court.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
EFF leader Julius Malema said at Wednesday's committee meeting that Didiza had no right to rely on the committee's legal opinion as cover for her own decision.
"Her advice doesn't have that option. It is your advice which has got that option. It's our advice, and she has no right to use our advice," Malema said.
He said the EFF is now asking its lawyers what can be done about the Speaker.
"She just abandoned her responsibility, which is to defend Parliament as another arm of the state," Malema said.
Ramaphosa came to Didiza's defence at the weekend, saying she is acting independently and in line with the constitution.
The EFF said that defence tells its own story.
"Her actions confirm a disturbing willingness to subordinate Parliament's constitutional obligations to the political interests of the ANC and President Ramaphosa," the party said in a statement.
The ANC's Dikeledi Direko backed Didiza inside Wednesday's meeting.
"She doesn't want to take a side. She's just going to let the law take its place. So she can't be crucified on that decision," Direko said.
Parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said Didiza's stance and the committee's stance are not in conflict.
"They are complementary and mutually reinforcing, and reflect their distinct but interconnected constitutional responsibilities," Mothapo said.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
The EFF also wrote to Didiza on 23 June arguing she is conflicted on any decision about how Parliament responds to Ramaphosa's legal challenges, because she voted against proceeding with the Section 89 inquiry in December 2022.
The inquiry stems from the 2020 theft of an estimated $580,000 hidden in a sofa at Ramaphosa's Phala Phala game farm in Limpopo.
