EFF leader Julius Malema told supporters outside the East London Magistrate’s Court that the party will remain in place until judgment is delivered in his pre-sentencing proceedings, which are expected to continue tomorrow.
The magistrate is expected to hand down a verdict, which Malema said will be appealed despite the outcome.
The court appearance forms part of a long-running legal matter linked to a 2018 incident at an EFF rally in the East London area, where Malema is accused of unlawfully handling and discharging a firearm during public celebrations.
Addressing supporters gathered outside court, Malema said: “So we are not going anywhere. We are going to wait here, until she delivers her judgment. But I can assure all of you, and I was telling some young journalist, I was talking to them inside, that tomorrow when they go home, this journalist, I will be going home with them.”
He added that the outcome would not change the party’s legal strategy.
“Like we said, it doesn’t matter the outcome. The fact that there is a guilty verdict, we are going to appeal this case until the highest court in the land. And when you say you are appealing a case, it doesn’t mean you don’t show remorse. It means you disagree with the conclusion of the magistrate, and therefore you appeal. It is allowed by the constitution of the Republic of South Africa.”
Malema further said the exercise of legal rights should not be misinterpreted as refusal to accept accountability.
“So when you exercise your rights, which we fought for, which we are still fighting for, it doesn’t mean you don’t show remorse. It means you disagree, and the laws of this country allow you to disagree with the magistrate, to disagree with the judges, until the constitutional court makes a final decision. Only then you will accept that I was wrong, because the constitutional court said so.”
Inside court, legal arguments focused on whether the state has established sufficient grounds to justify a custodial sentence.
Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi representing Malema, told the court that the state’s case is built on what he described as a misreading of key evidence, particularly around allegations of premeditation.
“Let’s look closely at why does the State say Mr Malema should go to jail… it’s clarified in the supplementary heads because there they identify four reasons and I want to address each and every one of them now,” he said.
He argued that the state relied on a quotation that was taken out of context. “Everything was perfect and calculated and designed to be the way it was done… he is not talking about planning the commission of an offence. He is talking about planning the celebration, the celebratory event,” he submitted.
Ngcukaitobi further accused the prosecution of distorting the evidence. “What they have done is that they have planted words in their heads of argument and then they have imputed a meaning that those words were never designed to achieve,” he said.
He added that the conduct described does not match typical cases of premeditation. “The second conviction is about one bullet, one bullet… ordinary cases of premeditation do not have that element because what you find is that a group of criminals sit and they plot how to execute an offence.”
Ngcukaitobi also noted that the state itself had described premeditation as the “most significant aggravating feature,” arguing that if that foundation is flawed, the argument for imprisonment is significantly weakened.
Saturday Star