South Africa halts impeachment against President Cyril Ramaphosa over stolen cash inquiry

South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa speaks with journalists after meeting with Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva at Planalto Palace in Brasilia, Brazil, on, March 9, 2026. (AP Photo/Luis Nova, FILE) JOHANNESBURG (AP) — A South African court ordered a halt to impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa over a scandal involving over $580 000 of cash stolen from his farm in 2020.The Western Cape High Court judgment on Friday does not stop the impeachment committee from doing other preparatory work for the pending proceedings.Lawmakers had started impeachment proceedings in June after a damning parliamentary report concluded the president had a case to answer regarding the handling of the theft, including why such large amounts of cash were kept in a sofa at the farm.The inquiry also includes questions over the source of the money, whether the foreign currency was legally declared and why he did not immediately report the theft to the police.Ramaphosa is challenging the report in court and applied for the impeachment proceedings to be halted until the process to review the report is complete. Ramaphosa welcomed Friday’s judgment, according to his office, which said he would “cooperate with and abide by processes of accountability.”“The President reaffirms his respect of judicial independence and separation of powers enshrined in our Constitution,” the office said in statement.The so-called “Phala-Phala scandal” has been one of Ramaphosa’s major political headaches since he became the country’s leader in 2018. 3 MIN READ 4 MIN READ 3 MIN READ The country’s Constitutional Court, the highest in the country, ruled earlier this year that the parliamentary report was valid and impeachment proceedings could proceed after the ANC had won a parliamentary vote to block it.The impeachment committee includes representatives from all political parties in the country’s Parliament. Most parties said Friday they would study the judgment and consider whether to appeal.