At the outset we must express our condolences to EFF leader Julius Malema for the loss of his grandfather, Rufus, a week ago. We hope he finds strength.
At the same time, it would be irresponsible of a newspaper that believes in the rule of law to fail to call Malema out as a public representative for his increasingly troubling conduct towards the judiciary.
A day before the burial of his grandfather, Malema, facing jail time after being convicted of firearms-related offences stemming from a 2018 incident when he fired a rifle into the air at a political rally in the Eastern Cape, held a lengthy press conference.
In addition to attacking a range of perceived enemies, he used the opportunity to respond to troubling evidence revealed recently about his association with controversial figures such as Gen Firoz Khan, the senior crime intelligence officer who is set to testify before the Madlanga commission of inquiry into corruption, political interference and collusion between criminal cartels and members of the police service.
Malema, who it should be noted was uncharacteristically soft on Andrea Johnson, the former head of the Independent Directorate Against Corruption, when she testified before parliament, has also played down his admiration for Khan.
Up until now Malema has co-operated with the commission, for which he is to be commended. But his remark that he would not tolerate being bullied by the commission, which is chaired by former deputy chief justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, crosses the line.
Telling the commissioners that he would not be treated “like a small boy” was unnecessary — they have done no such thing. Judges and commissioners are not beyond criticism. But they are owed respect, and confrontation without foundation sets a bad example coming from an MP and leader of a political party.
In the past, Malema and his party have used the courts to assert their rights. They have won some cases and lost others. There is therefore no justification for him or the EFF to cast aspersions on either the judiciary or the commission without good reason.
During the trial that led to his conviction in the Eastern Cape firearms case, Malema employed similar tactics in what amounted to an unsubtle attempt to bully the magistrate. Among others, he used the platform provided by the trial to attack the presiding officers, including insulting the magistrate’s looks and questioning her impartiality.
When judgment was about to be delivered, the EFF attempted to strong-arm the court into making a bigger venue available to accommodate Malema’s supporters, a clear intimidation tactic. When Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first post-apartheid president, appeared before the high court, he never asked for, nor expected, such an indulgence.
Even more concerning is that it seems to be lost on Malema and the EFF that he is no ordinary politician. Malema is both the leader of the fourth biggest political party in South Africa and a member of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC).
The JSC is the body charged with interviewing and recommending judges for the high courts and the Constitutional Court. Justice Madlanga’s last job came about through the JSC process.
John Hlophe, the impeached Western Cape judge president who is now parliamentary leader of Jacob Zuma’s MK party, failed in his bid to represent his party in the JSC, with good reason.
We would have expected a member of the JSC such as Malema to set an example by defending judges and the rule of law.
Business Day
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.