The scandal centres on a large sum of foreign currency stolen from President Cyril Ramaphosa’s farmhouse in 2020.

South Africa’s highest court has cleared the way for the revival of impeachment proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa, ruling that parliament’s decision to block an inquiry four years ago was inconsistent with the constitution.

Ramaphosa avoided impeachment proceedings in 2022 after his governing African National Congress (ANC) party used its parliamentary majority to reject a recommendation by an independent panel that he face an inquiry into the theft of a large sum of cash from his farmhouse two years earlier. The scandal, dubbed “Farmgate”, sparked accusations that he had failed to properly account for the source of the money hidden in a sofa.

On Friday, the Constitutional Court’s Chief Justice Mandisa Maya said: “The vote of the National Assembly taken on 13 December 2022 … is inconsistent with the Constitution, invalid, and it is set aside.”

The court ordered that the independent panel’s report be referred to an impeachment committee.

The case was brought by two opposition parties – the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the African Transformation Movement (ATM). The EFF has called on Ramaphosa, who has been in power since 2018, to resign.

Ramaphosa has denied any wrongdoing, saying the money came from the sale of buffalo at his farm.

An impeachment committee is due to review evidence against him before deciding whether to recommend formal proceedings. However, even if it does, the president would still likely survive a vote in the lower house of parliament, where a two-thirds majority is required to remove him from office. Ramaphosa’s ANC retains more than one-third of the seats in the National Assembly, despite losing its majority in 2024.

The allegations against Ramaphosa surfaced in June 2022 after South Africa’s former head of the State Security Agency, Arthur Fraser, accused him of attempting to cover up the theft at his farm. Fraser alleged that about $4m in foreign currency had been stolen. Ramaphosa disputes the total, maintaining that $580,000 was taken.

Since then, the president has faced repeated accusations that he sought to conceal the theft to avoid explaining why such a large amount of foreign currency was being stored at one of his properties rather than in a bank.

Following the ruling, Ramaphosa’s office said he respected the court’s judgement and that no one was above the law.

The impeachment committee is expected to take several months before deciding whether to vote for an inquiry.