Defend Truth

Politics

New court to decide if Malema has a potty mouth

New court to decide if Malema has a potty mouth

One court has ruled that Julius Malema engaged in hate speech, and one disciplinary committee has decided he said things detrimental to the ANC. Now a third court, the highest yet, will have to start from scratch in deciding whether he should be punished for his utterances. But this one could take years to resolve.

The Equality Court (which is essentially a dressed-up magistrate’s court) on Thursday referred the latest hate speech complaint against ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema to the High Court.

That means that all the parties involved, so far (Malema, complainant AfriForum, the ANC and the Freedom of Expression Institute among them) will have to start their arguments before a new judge, once a court date is set. And actual hearings will likely not even start for months, as the parties exchange more piles of documents.

At issue is whether Malema engaged in hate speech by using the words “dubula ibhunu” (“shoot the Boer”). That, in turn, means that the court may have to consider whether using those lyrics encouraged farm murders, or should be understood to be a historic reference.

The move to the High Court was a done deal as soon as Malema’s team decided to bring the application. Other courts have made interim decisions to ban the lyrics, and the whole issue of jurisdiction is clouded. If the change of forum had not come now, the High Court would likely have had a review of an eventual Equality Court judgment before it anyway, not least of all because of the importance the ANC places on the issue.

Malema has admitted one instance of shooting off his mouth (in a plea bargain with the ANC disciplinary committee set up to deal with him) and has a guilty verdict against his name from the Equality Court, for implying that the woman who accused Jacob Zuma of rape had consented after the fact. Those will be brought up by AfriForum, especially outside the court, but will not influence the outcome. The precedent set in the process used to arrive at the judgment may come into play, though.

By Phillip de Wet

Read more: Sapa, EWN

Gallery

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted

X

This article is free to read.

Sign up for free or sign in to continue reading.

Unlike our competitors, we don’t force you to pay to read the news but we do need your email address to make your experience better.


Nearly there! Create a password to finish signing up with us:

Please enter your password or get a sign in link if you’ve forgotten

Open Sesame! Thanks for signing up.

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options