By now, everybody has had a say about the conviction of the Julius Malema. We all know the facts and have a point of view.

Either you support him or you are rejoicing that he got sent to jail. Although there is still a lengthy legal battle ahead. Whatever the outcome, it clear that facts don’t matter for many so long as their desired outcome is achieved.

Just to recap, at a political rally in the Eastern Cape, in July 2018, Julius Malema was seen firing a semi-automatic rifle in the air. The video of the incident went viral and spark outrage in some quarters.

Other people have brushed this of as a silly, ill thought of stunt that maybe he shouldn’t have done or simply a much-ado-about-nothing.

Whatever you think about the incident, it still doesn’t take away from the fact that a crime was committed. Let’s just be clear, it is unlawful to discharge a firearm in a public place or built-up area without a legal reason in terms of the Firearms Control Act, Act 60 of 2000.

But Malema was also charged with Unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, reckless endangerment to a person or property and failure to take reasonable precautions. As for these charges, that’s really throwing the book at a person to ensure that the person is prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

So, after the state declined to prosecute Malema, a private prosecution, initiated by AfriForum, has led to a conviction and sentencing.

What are the ramifications?

For Malema, if the conviction and sentencing holds, that will effectively end his political career. More importantly, it is the sentencing part that is the troubling part for Malema.

The main permutation is that, if the sentence of five years is upheld, Malema will lose his seat as any member of parliament who is convicted and receives a sentence of more than twelve months imprisonment without the option of a fine, in other words, a direct prison sentence, looses their seat in parliament according to Section 47 (1) (e) of the Constitution of South Africa.

For Malema’s political foes, this would be a resounding victory and will ensure he and ultimately the EFF, is sidelined and become a mere foot note in history.

This is why his continuing legal battle is so important.

His legal team was granted leave to appeal his sentence. The court, Magistrate Olivier, feels that another competent court may come to a different sentencing. If she felt her sentence has appropriate or adequate she could have denied this leave to appeal. The court is not obligated to grant a leave to appeal if the court is convinced of the right decision was made.

But the leave to appeal is only for the sentencing. This means that the court i.e. the magistrate, feels that her conviction is sound in law and another competent court will not come to a different conclusion based on the same set of facts. This is positive for the court.

Julius Malema and his legal team however still have other options to appeal both the conviction and the sentencing.  This battle could be taken all the way to the Constitutional Court should there be a reasonable belief that his constitutional rights have been infringed.

Should the appeal to either reduce the sentence or overturn the conviction be successful, the first result will be he remains in parliament. Secondly, this will no doubt embolden Malema and elevate his status in the political landscape.

Victimhood is a serious commodity within the South African political landscape.

The Aftermath

After 16 April 2025, the day Malema was sentenced, everybody had an opinion on the matter. A significant number of people feel that the whole Malema case is nothing but a witch hunt by racists and his pollical enemies to get rid of him ahead of the Local Government elections to be held later in the year.

Others celebrate the conclusion of the case as a morale victory for law and order where no one is above the law.

Malema addressed his supporters outside the court and immediately attacked the magistrate calling her racist. Once again White Supremacy was the enemy trying to silence him and the voice of the EFF. Of course, Julius is entitled to express himself, so long as he is prepared to face the consequences thereof.

However, the fear of mass violence because of the outcome of this case has not materialised as was the case when former president, Jacob Zuma, was sent to jail in 2021. Will this remain the case should his appeals fail?

So, for now, not matter what you feel about this case, the saga is far from over and only time will tell if the conspiracies are truth or was this a simple legal matter.

The Paradox

Many people are citing other cases and pointing out that how this is an injustice perpetrated on Malema as other people have gotten off with lesser sentences or even been acquitted.

In December 2025, Bitou Municipality Deputy Mayor Nokuthula Kolwapi was also filmed discharging a firearm during an initiation celebration. The ANC called on the police to investigate the matter. She claimed that it was a replica firearm that fires blank rounds.

Will she be treated in the same manner even though there maybe a difference in circumstances? Well, we hope so.

Besides politicians, celebrities such as Shebeshxt and DJ Jaivane have also been arrested for discharging firearms in public. These cases have faded out of the public eye with no clear evidence of any convictions or acquittal in the public space.

This gives credence to Malema’s assertion that in South Africa, although unlawful, people often discharge firearms in public during celebrations.

Then there is the comparison to Jaco Pretorius who fired an air gun at a clash with EFF protesters in Brackenfell, Cape Town in 2020.  Once again apples and oranges. Yes, Jaco was convicted and then fined but the circumstances are not the same.  Yes, the main charge is the same.

The weapons used were different and the injuries that could be inflicted on a person is different. So would the case be if a replica pistol that fires blank rounds is discharged in public.

In the case of Jaco, this was done during a confrontation, and he could have offered a legal ground of justification that he feared for his life. In that case, the court may have found his belief reasonable but not factually legal and thus he was fined. But in all fairness to Malema, I have not investigated the facts of the case and am merely speculating on the court’s reason for the fine.

The paradox is that looking at Malema’s case is that this could be a political, racist conspiracy but looking at the facts as it stands now it is a simple criminal case where a person committed a crime, that was videoed, convicted and sentenced.

Accountability

It would have been nice to see Juluis Malema going to court accepting that he committed a crime and providing mitigating circumstances that he fired the rifle as a form of celebration as it seems is the custom in this country.

He placed himself at the mercy of the court and the judge then weighed this against the interests of the community and then sentenced him accordingly.

This kind of accountability could have gone a long way and sent the right message to his supporters and the country.

The indiscriminate way people just discharge firearms in public must stop, that is a serious issue which is being obscured by the politricks of the Malema case.

That leaves the question, what about his co-accused?  He was acquitted because Malema could not prove he got the firearm from Adrian Snyman, even though the rifle was registered to the company associated with Snyman.

That is shoddy prosecution, as a firearm belongs to someone or a company and that person or company must account for how Malema came to be in possession of that firearm.

Whether or not you support Malema, we must look at the facts and then make judgements, not revert to making this a racist or political issue. On the legal arguments, both sides have valid points.

Given Malema’s status this case will set a precedent when it comes to public figures and their behaviour in public.

As for AfriForum, will they be going after other public figures for criminality, with the same zest that they did for Malema or was Malema, right?