Thoko Didiza

The speaker chose partisan political interests over parliament’s constitutional obligations by refusing to oppose President Ramaphosa’s urgent application to interdict the work of the impeachment committee.

— From the EFF motion to remove the Speaker, in a letter signed by EFF chief whip Nontando Nolutshungu

The prevailing opinion based on the inputs made by the parties, is that the committee needs to oppose the urgent application of an interdict by the President. So that is the prevailing opinion of the committee. I don’t even need to put it to the vote. The numbers are such that those on the side of opposing, they are in the majority,” said Gana.

— Said by Makashule Gana, the chairperson of Parliament's Impeachment Committee, after deciding to oppose the President's urgent interdict application.

She doesn’t want to take a side. She’s just going to let the law take place. So, she can’t be crucified on that decision.

— Dikeledi Direko, ANC, saying Didiza has taken the right decision as a neutral party.

Even if only part of the impeachment enquiry is undertaken before the review application is determined, substantial harm will already have been done. In those circumstances, the review court will be confronted with a situation in which consequences flowing from the report have already occurred before the validity of the report has been determined. The effectiveness of the review proceedings will have been materially undermined.

— Cyril Ramaphosa, in his Friday papers discussing the potential harm of beginning impeachment hearings before the court rules on the review of the Independent Panel report