The SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has welcomed Wednesday’s Equality Court judgment that found EFF leader Julius Malema guilty of hate speech for utterances made at a rally in 2022.
The case stems from a protest by EFF members outside Brackenfell High School in 2020 in Cape Town. Party members and residents were involved in scuffles outside the school amid allegations that a matric dance had been organised exclusively for white pupils — later confirmed to be untrue.
At the rally two years later, Malema mentioned the school stand-off and urged supporters to “follow up” on a white man who was visible in video footage of the incident, suggesting he be taken to an “isolated space” and “attended to properly”. He further stated that “revolutionaries must not be scared to kill”, that racism should be confronted with violence, and that racist acts amounted to “an application to meet your maker with immediate effect”.
The SAHRC said it received a number of public complaints and, after due assessment, concluded the comments violated constitutional and statutory protections against hate speech.
In its ruling on Wednesday, the Equality Court, sitting in the Cape High Court, found the comments amounted to hate speech within the meaning of section 10 of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act.
“The Equality Court rejected arguments that the statements were merely political commentary or metaphorical in nature, finding instead that they amounted to direct, unambiguous incitement to violence on the basis of a prohibited ground, cloaked in ideological language,” said the SAHRC.
“The judgment recognised the danger posed when public figures and political leaders use rhetoric that undermines human dignity and social cohesion.”
The judgment relates only to the merits of the complaint. A separate process will be followed pertaining to the relief sought against Malema and the red berets.
The EFF described the judgment as a “grave distortion of history, philosophy and the nature of political speech in a democratic society” and said it would appeal against the outcome in “defence of political freedom, historical truth and the right of oppressed people to speak boldly against their oppression”.
The party said the judgment ignored three critical realities. Malema was speaking about the school incident where “white racists assaulted black protesters” and he had emphasised that racism itself was violence and could not be passively endured.
Second, the country was built on structural and physical violence against black people. “The anti-apartheid struggle included armed resistance because the system left no alternative as the system still does to this day to protect our children from continued racial discrimination.”
Third, the EFF was a Marxist-Leninist and Fanonian movement “therefore our analysis of society recognises class and racial contradictions. When Malema spoke of 'war,' it was a reference to the irreconcilable conflict between white supremacy and black consciousness, a war of ideas and systems, not an instruction to kill white people.”
TimesLIVE
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.