Khanyisile NgcoboJohannesburgFriday July 24, 2026
The 2020 theft of a large amount of cash from Ramaphosa’s private farm has continued to shadow his presidency
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has won a court order temporarily suspending a parliamentary inquiry into whether he should face impeachment over the controversy widely known as the “Farmgate” scandal.
An independent panel concluded in 2022 that Ramaphosa might have a case to answer after burglars stole a substantial sum of cash concealed inside a sofa at his private farm. The president has denied wrongdoing.
MPs voted at the time not to establish an impeachment inquiry. But in May, the Constitutional Court found that parliament had acted unlawfully when it set aside the panel’s report.
Ramaphosa is separately seeking to overturn the panel’s findings in a case scheduled to be heard in September.
The Constitutional Court’s May decision opened the door for parliament to restart the impeachment process.
Parliament’s political balance has shifted dramatically over the past four years. Ramaphosa’s African National Congress (ANC) lost its majority in the 2024 election and now governs through a coalition.
After the Constitutional Court ruling, Ramaphosa launched a legal challenge, arguing that the panel had “misconceived its mandate, misjudged the information placed before it and misinterpreted the four charges advanced against me”.
On Friday, Western Cape high court judge Andre le Grange ordered the parliamentary committee to suspend its hearings “pending the determination by this court of the applicant’s review” — referring to Ramaphosa’s challenge to the panel.
The decision gives Ramaphosa additional time as he seeks to clear his name through the courts.
His lawyers argued that allowing the impeachment committee to continue before the separate case was decided could inflict irreparable damage on his reputation.
Three judges considered the application, with two ruling for the president. Under the majority judgment, the impeachment proceedings must remain on hold until his other case has been heard and finalised.
The long-running controversy began with a 2020 robbery at Ramaphosa’s private Phala Phala farm in Limpopo province.
Burglars entered the property and stole at least $580,000 (£430,000) in US dollar notes that had been hidden in a sofa.
The theft remained out of public view for two years, until former South African spy chief Arthur Fraser disclosed it in an explosive dossier submitted to police.
Fraser, a close ally of Ramaphosa’s predecessor Jacob Zuma, alleged that the president had concealed the robbery from both police and tax authorities.
Because the stolen money was held in foreign currency, the episode also raised questions about possible breaches of exchange control laws.
Ramaphosa has said the money came from the sale of buffaloes.
In a statement released shortly after Friday’s decision, the president said he had noted and “respects” the court’s ruling.
The judgment drew sharply differing responses across South Africa’s political landscape.
The Democratic Alliance, the second-largest party in the governing coalition, said the outcome was not unexpected, but stressed that it did not “stop the committee from continuing with preparatory [work]”.
uMkhonto weSizwe (MK), the opposition party led by Zuma, accused Ramaphosa of turning to the courts to block a process intended to establish what happened at his private farm.
The ANC, meanwhile, welcomed the ruling and called on other parties to “refrain from politically motivated distortions” while the legal process continued.
Additional reporting by Pumza Fihlani in Johannesburg
