Cyril Ramaphosa claims ongoing impeachment proceedings will lead to significant humiliation, as the High Court weighs his urgent application to halt the inquiry into the Phala Phala allegations.

To subject a sitting head of state to the public spectacle of an impeachment inquiry on the back of a flawed Section 89 report would be a "humiliation" from which the President cannot easily recover.

That was the core argument of advocate Wim Trengove, representing President Cyril Ramaphosa. He said Ramaphosa stands to "suffer irreparable harm" to his reputation should the high court not issue an interdict to stay the impeachment committee's proceedings against him.

On Thursday, 16 July, the Western Cape Division of the High Court in Cape Town wrapped up two days of arguments in Ramaphosa's application. The President is seeking an urgent interdict to halt the committee's proceedings -- which stem from his conduct in the Phala Phala saga -- pending a review of the Section 89 independent panel report.

That panel, chaired by former Chief Justice Sandile Ngcobo, found that Ramaphosa had a case to answer over the theft of $580,000 in cash hidden in his sofa at his Phala Phala game farm.

In May, the Constitutional Court cleared the way for an impeachment process to begin when it ordered Parliament to refer the report to an impeachment committee. Ramaphosa subsequently launched a review...