Court challenge to halt President Ramaphosa's NDPP appointment process

Law firm B Xulu and Partners Incorporated has filed an urgent application at the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, to interdict President Cyril Ramaphosa from appointing the National Director of Public Prosecutions (NDPP). 

The legal challenge seeks to stop the appointment process scheduled for January 2026, when the current NDPP, Shamila Batohi, retires.

The law firm alleged that the advisory panel did not adequately consider the formal objection regarding Advocate Hermione Cronje's candidacy. 

This is after the firm’s director, Barnabas Xulu, submitted a 99-page objection accusing Cronje of “unlawful information peddling” and sharing confidential state information with external parties during her tenure as the leader of the NPA’s Investigating Directorate (ID) in 2020.

The firm claims the entire selection process was unlawful and biased, demanding that the advisory panel’s work be scrapped and its report withdrawn. 

With the hearing set for early in January, the respondents have been given until December 31, 2025, at 5pm to respond. 

Ramaphosa has been cited as the first respondent, while the advisory panel has been cited as the second respondent. Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, Mmamoloko Kubayi, has been mentioned as the third respondent. Cronje is the fourth respondent. 

While Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, Vincent Magwenya, did not respond, Justice and Constitutional Development spokesperson Terrence Manase confirmed that the department received the application. 

Manase said the department intends to oppose the application, adding that it does not meet the requirements for urgency and is premature, as Ramaphosa is still considering the report submitted by the panel.

“The relevant papers are currently under consideration,” he said. 

“In line with the applicable court rules, the department intends to file a Notice to Oppose on the basis that the application does not meet the requirements for urgency and is premature, as the president is still considering the report submitted by the advisory panel, which considered all inputs received in respect of all candidates interviewed,” Manase added.

Meanwhile, efforts to reach out to Cronje for her comment have been unsuccessful. However, even though she did not address the allegations levelled against her, she defended her professional record by highlighting the “skills catastrophe” and “levels of dysfunction” she faced at the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). Cronje maintained that while the NPA faced a crisis, it was “eminently fixable”.

In the affidavit, Xulu accused the advisory panel of lacking transparency, adding that it has demonstrated bias in favour of Cronje and orchestrated a situation “where she was not made to answer publicly, as was the case with other candidates”. 

He said this was done purposely to increase her prospects as a candidate. 

“Thus, the nub of this application is that the failure by the advisory panel to have our objection properly considered and transparently addressed by the fourth respondent (Cronje) is a gross irregularity that rendered the interview process reviewable,” read the affidavit. 

Xulu added that the differential treatment given to Cronje demonstrates that the panel did not treat all candidates equally, which renders the process unfair. 

The law firm also alleged that Cronje was given a different set of rules compared to other candidates, which enabled her to engage directly with the panel even after the interview had been concluded.

Xulu also stated that the panel failed to identify and question the “obvious credence” to information peddling allegations that emerged directly from Cronje’s responses in the interview, where she stated on numerous occasions that she would obtain information of the NPA when she was no longer employed by the prosecuting authority.

He said this was a clear admission that she is a person who actively engages in the unlawful exchange of confidential information without any regard for the unlawfulness of her conduct. 

“We record that the failure of the advisory panel to question her on this conduct lends further credence to the thrust of our core allegation of bias and dereliction of duty against the advisory panel,” read the papers.

Meanwhile, IOL reported that Batohi's deputy, Advocate Anton du Plessis, has resigned from his position, citing personal and family reasons.

manyane.manyane@inl.co.za