Quote of the week

Mr Zuma is no ordinary litigant. He is the former President of the Republic, who remains a public figure and continues to wield significant political influence, while acting as an example to his supporters… He has a great deal of power to incite others to similarly defy court orders because his actions and any consequences, or lack thereof, are being closely observed by the public. If his conduct is met with impunity, he will do significant damage to the rule of law. As this Court noted in Mamabolo, “[n]o one familiar with our history can be unaware of the very special need to preserve the integrity of the rule of law”. Mr Zuma is subject to the laws of the Republic. No person enjoys exclusion or exemption from the sovereignty of our laws… It would be antithetical to the value of accountability if those who once held high office are not bound by the law.

Khampepe j
Secretary of the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector including Organs of State v Zuma and Others (CCT 52/21) [2021] ZACC 18
18 June 2008

Oh Mr Malema, what are you smoking?

It would be easy to dismiss ANC Youth League president Julius Malema as an irresponsible fool. That he surely is, but fools can be dangerous – just ask the relatives of Iraqi’s who were killed during or after the American invasion ordered by another irresponsible fool, George W Bush – so we may do well to take this fool seriously.

According to The Times, Malema told a Youth day rally that his organisation is “prepared to take up arms and kill” if the impending fraud and corruption court case against Jacob Zuma is not dropped. Malema, who was addressing a Youth Day rally in Thaba Nchu, Free State, said Zuma’s trial would “divide the country”, as the ANC leader is widely expected to be the country’s president when the trial begins in earnest around 2010.

When Malema was pressed by Redi Direko of Talk Radio 702 yesterday morning, he contradicted and confirmed his statements, saying:

If anybody threatens our democracy we don’t need anybody’s permission to act. Prosecution of Zuma is political. We are prepared to kill and die for forces of darkness who undermine the black majority or those who are opposed to progress.

Julius Malema

I must say, when I first saw pictures of Malema I was rather smitten – he is such a pretty guy – but now it turns out he is not at all boyfriend material. He sounds like a cross between Robert Mugabe and a character from Lord of the Rings, huffing and puffing and muttering about the Dark Lord Sauron.

But what to do about this out of control youngster? Of course, if the ANC was serious about instilling discipline in its cadres they would first unequivocally distance themselves from these dangerous statements and would then institute disciplinary proceedings against him. Surely he has bought the name of the organisation into disrepute? Should he not be “dealt with” and expelled – at the very least? What more must he do? Flash his buttocks for the camera?

Some have suggested that his comments constitute “hate speech” and that he could be held to account in terms of the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act (PEPUDA). Section 10 of the Act prohibits anyone from making statements based on one or more of the prohibited grounds like race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or disability “against any person, that could reasonably be construed to demonstrate a clear intention to be hurtful; be harmful or to incite harm; or promote or propagate hatred”.

But as his words were not directed at an identifiable group listed in PEPUDA (whites; woman; homosexuals, Muslims), he has clearly not infringed this prohibition against hate speech in PEPUDA. “Hate speech” is a much abused term in our body politic and whenever a person says something nasty or stupid some politician (Patricia are you there?) runs to the Human Rights Commission to complain about “hate speech”. Often – like in the present case – there is no grounds for such a complaint because a listed group was not targeted by the speech.

But it is a criminal offense to unlawfully and intentionally engage in conduct which defeats or obstructs the course of the administration of justice. To threaten to begin killing unspecified people if Mr Zuma is tried (let alone if he is convicted) could well fall within the ambit of this criminal offense. Surely by stating that Mr Zuma’s trial must be stopped and that the Youth League is prepared to kill to prevent Mr Zuma from being convicted he is interfering with the administration of justice. If I was the judge in any of Mr Zuma’s trials I would be rather nervous and would feel intimidated by such irresponsible talk.

Somebody with some time on their hands should lay a criminal charge against Mr Malema with the police. Maybe we can ask Gandolf or Frodo to do it for us?

2015 Constitutionally Speaking | website created by Idea in a Forest