President Cyril Ramaphosa wants the Constitutional Court to rule that he is not legally obliged to explain his cabinet reshuffle decisions, if and when the rationality of those decisions are challenged in court. The outcome of this case — which was originally linked to the DA’s review of then president Jacob Zuma’s controversial decision to fire former finance minister Pravin Gordhan and his deputy Mcebisi Jonas — arguably has significant political implications for Ramaphosa. His advocate, Ishmael Semenya, argued in court on Thursday that the constitution confers powers on the president to appoint or dismiss cabinet ministers. “During his term of office, the [president] is most likely to change the constitution of his cabinet, either by reallocating ministers to different department or dismissing them and appointing others in their stead,” Semenya said. He said the question of whether Ramaphosa had to explain his reshuffle decisions “will arise in every instance” if a ruling that or...

BL Premium

This article is reserved for our subscribers.

A subscription helps you enjoy the best of our business content every day along with benefits such as exclusive Financial Times articles, ProfileData financial data, and digital access to the Sunday Times and Times Select.

Already subscribed? Simply sign in below.

Questions or problems? Email or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now