Julius Malema's incitement ruled hate speech in court decision that may deepen political divide

Key topics:Equality Court rules Malema’s 2022 remarks incited violence.DA and RP hail judgment as victory for accountability.Case reignites debate over free speech and polarisation.Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here..By Kerry Lanaghan.South African opposition leader Julius Malema has been found guilty of hate speech by the Western Cape Equality Court, following remarks made at a 2022 rally. The case underscores the deep sensitivities around political rhetoric in a country still negotiating its post-apartheid identity.According to the BBC, the court ruled that Malema’s words - delivered after an alleged assault on an EFF supporter by a white man - amounted to incitement. Malema told the crowd: “No white man is going to beat me up... you must never be scared to kill. A revolution demands that at some point there must be killing.”The court found that this crossed the line between robust political rhetoric and incitement to violence. “Whilst calling out someone who behaves as a racist may be acceptable, calling for them to be killed is not,” the judgment read. It labelled his statement an act of vigilantism and “an incitement of the most extreme form of harm possible.”Two complaints had been filed: one by the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) and another by an individual who claimed they felt threatened by Malema’s remarks. The EFF, however, dismissed the ruling as “fundamentally flawed,” arguing that it misinterpreted both the history of liberation struggle rhetoric and the metaphorical nature of Malema’s words.The judgment comes amid increasing international scrutiny of Malema. Earlier this year, the UK Home Office barred him from entering the country, citing his history of inflammatory statements and vocal support for Hamas. In May, US President Donald Trump confronted President Cyril Ramaphosa in Washington, playing footage of Malema chanting “Kill the Boer” at an EFF rally. Although South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled that such liberation songs should not be understood literally, Afrikaner lobby groups have long argued they incite violence against white farmers.Reaction from opposition parties was swift. In a press release from the Democratic Alliance (DA), party leader John Steenhuisen welcomed the ruling as “a victory for the rule of law, the Constitution, and all South Africans who cherish a free, fair, and non-racial society.” He praised the SAHRC for pursuing the matter and warned that Malema’s rhetoric undermines social cohesion and damages South Africa’s international reputation. Steenhuisen said the DA would explore further steps to ensure accountability, adding: “A political leader who incites mass murder is not normal, nor permissible.” The DA framed the ruling as vindication of its stance against allowing the EFF near government power, saying the judgment reaffirmed that no one is above the law.The Referendum Party (RP) also welcomed the ruling but struck a more strident tone. In its statement, the RP called for sanctions “to the fullest extent of the law,” arguing that Malema has been allowed to issue racist tirades with “near total impunity.” The party criticised the Constitutional Court’s earlier ruling that “Kill the Boer” could not be deemed hate speech, calling it “disgraceful” and a double standard that had fuelled international condemnation. The RP further argued that Malema and similar African nationalist leaders are fundamentally rejected in the Western Cape, using the case to bolster its call for the province to pursue greater autonomy: “It is time for the Western Cape to determine its own future democratically - not to have it dictated by racist politicians like Julius Malema.”The conviction highlights the ongoing tension between South Africa’s constitutional commitment to free expression and its legal prohibitions on hate speech. While Malema’s opponents hailed the ruling as a milestone for accountability, it also risks deepening political polarisation. For Malema’s supporters, the judgment is seen as another attempt to silence a radical voice challenging entrenched inequalities; for his critics, it is long overdue recognition that his rhetoric crosses into dangerous territory.

Julius Malema's incitement ruled hate speech in court decision that may deepen political divide

Key topics:

Related Stories