Sign in
Download Opera News App

Politics Policy

 

Politics

 

Africa politics

The matter of Adv Mkhwebane vs Cyril Ramaphosa(OPINION)


Why's the Constitutional Court delaying the matter of Adv Mkhwebane vs Cyril Ramaphosa

This judgement is set to REMOVE RAMAPHOSA from office

The matter has already been heard by the Con-Court, & judgement was scheduled for February 2021.

The critical finding of the Public Protector report into CR17 Bank Statements, is that Ramaphosa "willfully mislead Parliament" concerning the R500 000 Bossasa donation to the CR17 Campaign.

Willfully misleading Parliament is a criminal offence, under the Parliamentary Powers Privileges & Immunities Act.

This Act further prohibits guilty offenders from holding public office.

The decision by Ramaphosa to review the PP report in court, has lead to there being no need for the NPA to be the litigant against Ramaphosa, given that NPA boss Shamila Batohi stands accused of receiving R1,7 million from the CR17 Bank Statements.

One of the Con-Court justices tried to argue with Mkhwebane's legal counsel, that Ramaphosa had later attempted to correct his initial statement to Parliament, however there was unanimous consent amongst the justices, that this attempt had no bearing on the initial lie, so there's no way of riggling out of this for Ramaphosa.

The best Ramaphosa can plead for, is the court's mercy for a suspended sentence, so he doesn't have to spend jail time.

Yes Removed by a paltry R500 000

Why is the Con-Court delaying judgement.

OPINION EXPRESSED

Content created and supplied by: Alupheli. (via Opera News )

Adv Mkhwebane Con-Court Constitutional Court Public Protector Ramaphosa

COMMENTS

Load app to read more comments