DA's push for Phala Phala ad-hoc committee vs ATM's Sec 89 Committee - here's the difference

The DA remains adamant that an ad-hoc committee is the most appropriate and effective means through which to hold President Cyril Ramaphosa accountable for the allegations stemming from the Phala Phala robbery in February 2020. But in July this year, National Assembly Speaker Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula denied their request, citing other organs of state which were dealing with the matter. Meanwhile, the Speaker announced that she would refer the African Transformation Movement's (ATM) Section 89 motion - to impeach Ramaphosa - to an independent panel composed of three panel members. DA deputy chief whip Siviwe Gwarube told BizNews parties have until 1 September to put forward their nominations for the panel. She argues that a newly announced probe into the Phala Phala matter by the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence (JSCI) would be limited in its scope, probing only two aspects. These include deputy state security minister Zizi Kodwa's alleged involvement in a cover-up, and the abuse of intelligence funds. Ramaphosa would be spared scrutiny by the JSCI, which operates behind closed doors with all committee members sworn to secrecy. Should the Section 89 Committee find a prima facie case for Ramaphosa’s impeachment, Gwarube explains it will require a two-thirds majority to boot the President from office. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices