President Cyril Ramaphosa has asked chief justice Mandisa Maya for consent to litigate against retired justice Sandile Ngcobo before taking on review an independent panel review on the Phala Phala saga, a move experts said is legally sound.The independent panel report, authored by a team led by retired chief justice Sandile Ngcobo, found that Ramaphosa may have a case to answer regarding a robbery at his Phala Phala game farm. The request seeks consent for the president to litigate against Ngcobo, who was asked to lead the panel by parliament. Ngcobo headed the independent panel that found the president may have committed a serious violation of the law in the Phala Phala saga. The findings of the report form the foundation of a parliamentary impeachment inquiry the speaker is now instituting. In a recent judgment the Constitutional Court made an order for referral of the independent panel report to the impeachment committee. The president was previously shielded from the impeachment inquiry after the National Assembly in 2022 voted to neither adopt the report nor refer the matter to the impeachment committee.The president has decided to take the report on review.Several legal experts told Business Day the president’s consent move is legally sound to avoid delays in the review application. Section 47 of the Superior Courts Act requires litigants in civil proceedings to seek permission from a head of court before instituting litigation against a judge. Mbekezeli Benjamin, a Judges Matter researcher focusing on judiciary matters, said it was necessary for the president to comply with section 47 to avoid the review being dismissed on procedural grounds.Should the president not comply with the provision, he said, the matter could be raised by any of the parties in the review application and could result in the review taking long to reach finality. “It is a necessary step. If you do not take that procedural step the litigation you bring is void. If Ramaphosa files the review application, Ngcobo or any of the parties can say, ‘you have not complied with section 47, your case should be dismissed’,” he said. Judges Matter is a group that focuses on research and advocacy projects dedicated to enhancing transparency and accountability in South Africa’s judiciary. Former presidents Jacob Zuma and Thabo Mbeki had their case, seeking to have retired justice Sisi Khampepe removed as chair of a commission probing allegations of political interference in the delay of prosecutions of apartheid-era crimes, dismissed by the high court in Johannesburg for similar reasons. The former presidents did not obtain permission from Maya before litigating against Khampepe, leading to the case being dismissed on technical grounds ― without consideration of the merits, in a majority judgment penned by judge Thifhelimbilu Mudau in March. Benjamin said the president’s request to the chief justice is a safe move to avoid the same fate. The debate and requirement for litigants to seek consent or face cases dismissed without being heard on merits were intensified after Gauteng high court judge Fiona Dippenaar’s 2025 judgment on section 47 in the case by mineral & petroleum resources minister Gwede Mantashe against former chief justice Raymond Zondo.Dippenaar found the section afforded protection to judges in both their judicial and nonjudicial functions, hence the president’s move to apply for consent, though Ngcobo in writing the report was a chair of the panel and not necessarily a judge. That case puts the spotlight on the applicability of the section and whether it applies to judges when chairing commissions of inquiry and whether litigants needed to seek consent before taking commission report on review. Benjamin said litigants who have not complied with section 47 have suffered losses in court. “He [Ramaphosa] does have to seek consent because he is litigating against a judge, what the court order [the Dippenaar judgment] says is the requirement for section 47 applies across the board. “It applies when a judge is doing an official role or even in their private role, so every time you want to sue a judge under any circumstances you are required to comply with section 47. The only exception is if it is a domestic violence issue,” he said. Former deputy finance minister Sfiso Buthelezi was recently dealt a blow in the review application seeking to scrap parts of the commission of inquiry into allegations of state capture after Maya did not grant permission for the litigation against Zondo. The request was refused because Buthelezi sought permission after instituting the litigation. Ramaphosa’s litigation started with consent before the review. The panel report, which the president is taking on review, in 2022 found the president may have committed a serious violation of the law which requires any person who holds a position of authority to report the theft of R100,000 or more to the police.The matter was pinned on a 2020 cash theft of about $580,000 that had been concealed in a couch at the Phala Phala game farm.The panel found the president may have a case to answer because he reported the theft of foreign currency to Gen Wally Rhoode, a member of the Presidential Protection Unit, but did not report it directly to the police.• This article has been updated with more information.