Malema's defence claims misinterpretation of evidence as sentencing verdict approaches
The pre-sentencing proceedings in the high-profile firearm discharge case involving Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema have been postponed.
Image: Social Media/EFF
Judgment on sentencing is expected on Thursday in the long-running legal matter linked to a 2018 incident at an EFF rally in the East London area, where Julius Malema is accused of unlawfully handling and discharging a firearm during public celebrations.
Malema was found guilty in October last year of discharging the firearm at an EFF birthday rally in Mdantsane.
His former bodyguard Adriaan Snyman, who was charged alongside him, was acquitted.
The EFF leader 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, after the matter was postponed on Wednesday.
“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," Malema told supporters.
"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."
Inside court, legal arguments focused on whether the State 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.