The East London Magistrate’s Court has convicted EFF leader Julius Malema of violating the Firearms Control Act.
Since 2018, Malema and his bodyguard, Adriaan Snyman, have been on trial for firing a gun at the fifth birthday festivities in Mdatsane. Additionally, Snyman and Malema were charged with illegally possessing a handgun.
Malema had informed the court that the gun was a toy, and both entered not guilty pleads. Snyman was found not guilty on two charges, while Malema was found guilty on five.Over the course of the three-day marathon verdict, Malema was clearly disinterested, yawning and distracted. He occasionally lowered his head.According to Magistrate Twanet Olivier’s ruling, other witnesses were adequate to establish Malema’s guilt, and the video recording of the incident was not a crucial piece of evidence. The magistrate declared, “The court believes that the viral footage is not required to enable the court to arrive at a finding in this regard.”
Malema’s bail was increased, and the case was rescheduled for the presentencing reports on January 23. Olivier explained that the defence might want to call witnesses to speak in favour of the EFF leader, therefore there was no assurance that Malema would be sentenced on that day.
Advocate Shane Matthews, Malema’s attorney, had previously contended that the state had not established beyond a reasonable doubt that Snyman had given Malema a firearm.Matthews asserted that instead of using people who were present, the state had depended on a video that was downloaded from social media. At least 20,000 to 30,000 individuals who had gathered for the celebration were on the scene. As we have seen, a number of well-known individuals were in attendance.
Not a single individual voiced their displeasure with the events of that particular evening until long after the dust had fallen. Instead, an investigation was started after the police discovered a video on social media that purportedly showed Malema shooting what they said was a firearm into the air.
In this instance, the complainants are actually the police.”No one has been up to testify that the public was put in risk because the bodyguard carried a loaded gun.
The state acknowledged that the fact that accused number two gave accused number one any firearm at all cannot be used to support a conviction.Nonetheless, the state contended that witnesses it brought during the trial supported the facts depicted in the film. It stated that the bullet cartridge, which was connected to a pistol from Snyman’s company and discovered by a municipal employee at the stadium two days following the EFF rally festivities, was another important piece of evidence.
“Your worship, this is just a regular individual going about her daily business on that particular day. She does not care about this specific issue.
Advocate Joel Cesar contended that she had no idea what the spent cartridge she had picked up was.According to Cesar, the state provided convincing proof to support its claims. “A real firearm from the second accused’s company was brought into this court, along with a real spent cartridge, so the court could review and view the video.” “I believe and submit that the court was best positioned to evaluate the evidence, examine it, and reach a decision in this regard.”
In 2023, Malema requested that the case be dismissed; however, Olivier denied this request. In response, the EFF accused the magistrate of being corrupt and incompetent, which sparked calls for an apology.
Malema retorted, “They will get it [an apology] in hell.”
Edited by Matlala Kgaugelo
