Julius Malema
Image: Abongile Ginya
The wait is almost over for Julius Malema, who will learn on Thursday morning how he will be punished for firing shots into the air before thousands of supporters.
This comes eight years after the EFF leader discharged a semi-automatic firearm during the party’s fifth anniversary celebrations in Mdantsane.
He was convicted in October 2025 on five counts under the Firearms Control Act.
Co-accused Adriaan Snyman was acquitted.
The court previously heard that Snyman handed the firearm to Malema during the event.
Police, meanwhile, say they are ready to deal with any incidents that may crop up before and after the sentencing at the KuGompo City Magistrate’s Court.
"Police are fully prepared to maintain public order," spokeswoman Brigadier Nobuntu Gantana said.
"Adequate personnel have been deployed to ensure the safety of all court officials, Malema, legal teams, media, and the public.
"The deployment is proportionate to the risk assessment."
The first day of sentencing proceedings got underway on Wednesday.
Both the state and defence tendered their final arguments before magistrate Twanet Olivier.
Prosecutor Adv Joel Cesar told the court the state is seeking a prison term of up to 15 years for Malema.
Alternatively, he asked for a sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment, with three years suspended, along with fines on the remaining counts.
If Malema is sentenced to more than 12 months in prison without the option of a fine, he will lose his seat in Parliament.
Advocate Laurance Hodes, for the defence, told Olivier that all five charges arose from a single incident lasting less than two minutes.
"To impose a custodial sentence for a single, brief incident of this nature would be disproportionate and inappropriate," he said.
He outlined Malema’s personal circumstances, saying he is now 45, was 37 at the time of the incident, has no previous convictions and has "led a blameless life".
There have been no similar incidents since 2018, he said.
Hodes also told the court that Malema received the rifle from someone likely linked to security services, describing it as a licensed weapon.
He said Snyman handed the firearm to Malema, who borrowed it for the event, held it for less than a minute while firing, and returned it immediately.
Malema did not obtain the weapon illegally and had no intention of using it for any other purpose, he said.
Hodes also cited other cases where people discharged firearms in public but did not receive prison sentences.
In one case, a man fired a Glock pistol under a table in a restaurant with about 220 people present, causing damage but no injuries, and received a three-year suspended sentence. I
In another, he said, two intoxicated police officers fired shots in a public area and received partially suspended sentences with fines.
Hodes argued that the state was inconsistent, describing Malema as an ordinary person who should be treated equally before the law, while also relying on his status as a political leader to argue for a harsher sentence.
Cesar however told the court the firearm used was an assault rifle, not a handgun, with more powerful ammunition that could have caused fatal consequences.
He referred to video footage of the incident as a "silent witness".
Cesar argued that Malema placed more than 20,000 people at risk during the rally in Mdantsane, one of the most densely populated areas in the country.
He said the video showed people running, with several individuals in the line of fire, and stressed that Malema fired more than one shot.
He argued that Malema, as a public representative, had set a dangerous example.
Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi delivered the defence’s rebuttal, arguing again for a non-custodial sentence.
He claimed AfriForum was behind the prosecution, but Olivier stopped him, saying he was going off track. Ngcukaitobi said he was referring to points raised by the state.
Malema addressed supporters outside court shortly after proceedings ended.
"We have received a lot of letters, messages, from people, churches saying they are praying for us, so everything goes according to the will of God," he said.
"We don't take anything for granted.
"There is nothing that will disrupt the revolution. No one has reason to panic.
"I am too old to be shaken by young Afrikaner boys. I will appeal this case up to the highest court."
Legal expert Ulrich Roux said the offences that Malema has been charged with and convicted of do not fall under the Minimum Sentences Act.
"So, in other words, there is no minimum sentence prescribed for the offences that he has been convicted of," he said.
"The sentencing is therefore completely at the discretion of the magistrate."
Roux said Olivier must weigh the personal circumstances of Malema, the severity of the offence, and the message the sentence will send to society.
"In other words, whether it will deter would-be offenders from committing similar crimes and prevent such offences in future," he said.
"These factors must be balanced with a measure of mercy by the magistrate, and a just sentence must be handed down."
He said one factor that may count against Malema was that he has shown no remorse.
"Though he has been convicted of the crimes he was charged with, he remained adamant that he was innocent and did nothing wrong," Roux said.
"He does so despite the fact that his version — that it was a toy gun — was completely disregarded and rejected by the court, which in my view was not a strong version to rely on.
"The ballistics expert called by the state clearly proved that live ammunition was fired."
He said it was difficult to predict what sentence would be handed down.
"I do think, given that he has no previous convictions, that he will most likely receive a sentence of imprisonment that is suspended, coupled with a fine.
"In my opinion, a direct custodial sentence is unlikely."
IOL