Illustrative image. Julius Malema (Photo: Leila Dougan) 
On the day that Julius Malema took a weapon from his bodyguard and then fired it in the air, he probably had no conception that it would end this way.
Now he faces the prospect of both being labelled a criminal and, more importantly, being unable to represent his party in Parliament.
As has been repeatedly discussed in cases relating to Jacob Zuma and others, if someone is found guilty of an offence leading to a sentence of more than one year in prison, they cannot be an MP for a period of five years.
While there will first be a sentencing proceeding, and then no doubt several appeals, a jail term is actually fairly likely.
style="font-weight: 400;">Newzroom Afrika in the minutes after the judgment, the law stipulates a jail term of 15 years for this offence, unless there are exceptional circumstances (this is particularly the case because he fired a semi-automatic weapon. In cases with lesser sentences, people have fired a handgun, not an assault rifle.)
It is not clear what those exceptional circumstances might be.
As Roux explains, someone qualifying for a lesser sentence would also have to show remorse. Malema has already claimed this is a racist and political judgment, and was found by Magistrate Twanet Olivier to have been disrespectful while giving his evidence.
This makes it unlikely that he can now show remorse.
Read more: Malema vows to appeal against gun conviction as possible prison sentence looms
One leader party
One of the main sources of the EFF’s strength in the past 11 years has been how Malema weaponised Parliament through the use of invective and violence.
Before the EFF and Malema entered Parliament in 2014, it was often a very quiet place. He changed that almost immediately, to the point where just a few months later in 2015, he and his entire caucus were removed from the National Assembly by force.
Despite a change of strategy in Parliament, it has still been a useful podium for him, allowing him to put pressure on the ANC and President Cyril Ramaphosa.
Also, it has allowed him to lead the EFF caucus there. In the absence of other obvious leaders, the caucus might be less effective.
This also comes as the EFF appears to have suffered a brain-drain of other leaders.
In the year after the EFF lost support in the 2024 election, the party lost its deputy leader Floyd Shivambu and one of its other major figures in Mbuyiseni Ndlozi.
Read more: Malema faces a prescribed sentence of 15 years, but he’ll probably receive less
This has displayed Malema’s major weakness: he has been unable to grow leaders, and thus a sustainable party.
As a result, were he actually jailed and removed from public politics for a period of say three years, the EFF may not actually survive.
He has formed it in his image, and the lack of an obvious successor might see its brand dramatically weakened.
Pure ego
For the moment, a long jail term, on balance, seems unlikely. Certainly, that prospect is probably at least two years away.
But there is another aspect to this case that calls into question Malema’s judgment.
The firing of the rifle in 2018 was to essentially show what a “revolutionary” he is. It was clearly an attempt to put him in the same league as a Che Guevara or a Muammar Gaddafi.
And yet, when he was asked about this in court, he argued that it was not a real gun, but a toy gun.
This means that he was arguing, seriously, that he is such a serious revolutionary that he was firing a toy gun into the air.
This is a good example of a completely unforced error. It was pure ego. Nothing else.
It was also completely in character. This is a person who told Parliament just two years ago that, “I’m in charge, I’ve got you by the scrotum.”
Things might look very different were he to face time in prison.
Court campaign
All of that said, our history is rich with examples of people who have used court appearances to bolster their political position.
The most famous, of course, is former president Jacob Zuma. He used his appearances outside courts as a campaigning tool.
Most famously, it was Malema himself, in the minutes after the Nicholson judgment, which found Zuma had been the victim of political interference (and was then overturned), who first said “Bye bye Mbeki, bye bye” in 2008. Ten days later, Mbeki had resigned as president.
Malema himself used his testimony in the Equality Court in Joburg in the first “Kill the Boer” case in 2011 as a campaigning tool, when he was still leader of the ANC Youth League.
Malema is likely to use what has always been his most potent campaigning tool, race, during these appearances.
Already, he hinted during his address to EFF supporters in the moments after Wednesday’s judgment that he was likely to claim that he was a victim of a racist magistrate, and possibly a racist system.
His supporters have already included Helen Zille in their chants, suggesting they are already focusing on the local elections.
However, much has changed since 2008. And the EFF of 2025 and 2026 is very different to the ANC of 2008 and 2011. It has nothing like the campaigning power of the ANC, and thus Zuma, had during that time.
Malema has been so prominent for so long, it seems unlikely that many people will change their views one way or another based on his possible jail term, or his campaigning.
There is still a long road to traverse before Malema’s fate is sealed. This verdict might be confirmed or reversed, he might be jailed or fined, or merely receive a suspended sentence.
But this does carry the risk that this verdict could be the beginning of the end of the EFF as one of our bigger parties, unless Malema can campaign so effectively that he brings significant growth to the party.
The verdict could be a major turning point in the history of the EFF. DM