Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema appeared last week, Friday, 23 January, in the Magistrate’s Court on charges of unlawfully discharging a firearm at a party rally in Mdantsane. During the pre-sentencing proceedings, the court continues to consider issues of responsibility, risk, regret, and the wider ramifications of firearm-related offences, casting the pre-sentencing proceedings, casting doubt on Malema’s political future. Magistrate Twanet Olivier must weigh submissions from both the state and the defence before imposing a sentence.
Tension rose in court as Magistrate Olivier questioned the Defence’s social worker, who had compiled a pre-sentencing report. The Magistrate placed emphasis on the broader context of gun violence in the nation and the importance of assessing both the risk of reoffending and the societal consequences of unlawful firearm use.
The social worker maintained that, while the conviction had consequences for Malema, these should be assessed in the context of his personal circumstances and the nature of the offence. She drew a distinction between celebratory or one-off firearm use and criminal intent to commit further offences. “In this case, the firearm was not obtained with the intention to commit other crimes or to contribute to ongoing violence in the country,” she said. “There was no violence, no injury.” Magistrate Olivier pressed on the seriousness of the act, cautioning against minimising the offence because no one was harmed. “The danger lies in the risk created,” she said. “The absence of injury does not remove the unlawful nature of the conduct or the potential for catastrophic consequences.”
The court also examined financial and family considerations cited in the report. The state questioned the social worker on donations made by Malema and whether she had investigated the source of funds. “Certain financial matters fall outside the scope of my mandate,” the social worker said. “Issues relating to third parties or confidential sources are inaccessible and unnecessary for my report.”
It should be clear from the above extract that the social worker is not being named to protect her identity. She approached Malema’s offence with caution, which was not a simple task given the defendant’s high-profile status. Nonetheless, the risk posed by discharging a firearm at a political rally represents a gross display of carelessness. Greater caution should have been exercised. The use of a weapon to emphasize a non-lethal political statement must be avoided. It is comparable to the chainsaw performance staged by Elon Musk at election rallies for U.S. President Donald Trump. However, firing a gun on stage is far more dangerous than switching on a chainsaw. Malema placed the lives of his supporters at the rally at risk.
Malema is not well known for his caution. The EFF leader, however, has overstepped by firing a gun at a political rally. The purpose of the shooting was to emphasize a point and drive it home to his supporters. With regard to the payments Malema made to his family and household, Magistrate Olivier may empower the East London police and the court’s state prosecutor to investigate.
After the pre-sentencing hearing, Malema discharged fire in a different way. This time, U.S. President Donald Trump was the target. The firebrand EFF leader accused the American President of being “Satan” and urged his supporters to refer to Trump as such when speaking to their children.
According to TimesLive, the feud between Malema and Trump intensified over Trump’s demands that the South African government arrest Malema for his association with the controversial “Kill the Boer, kill the farmer” chant, a slogan Trump has repeatedly cited in alleging a supposed “white genocide” in South Africa, claims rejected by South African officials and Malema himself. The EFF leader reiterated his party’s stance on race relations in South Africa, emphasising that the party opposes white supremacy, not white people, and affirming that there is “no white genocide” in the country. He distinguished between white citizens and right‑wing lobby groups such as AfriForum, warning that the latter would not be tolerated.
Malema and the EFF are known for their Marxist tendencies. However, the party and its leader are right to argue against white supremacy rather than against people of a certain race. The EFF still has a significant following, as it is the fourth-largest party in parliament. Although “Kill the Boer, Kill the Farmer” is an inflammatory song, it forms part of the anti-apartheid struggle heritage. Nevertheless, it should be left in the past, as a new legacy needs to be created. The Trump Administration, it must be noted, added fuel to an already blazing wildfire during President Cyril Ramaphosa’s visit to Washington at the beginning of 2025, when he sought to repair South African–U.S. relations. Trump, however, was not interested.
It should be clear from the outset that Malema has caused significant damage to his political reputation after opening fire with a rifle during a public rally. As the court case unfolds in April, it is likely that Malema will face some form of probation and a fine. A prison sentence, if imposed, could last anywhere from a month to a year.
Article written by:
Yacoob Cassim
Journalist at Radio Al Ansaar
