The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has vowed that one of its first acts in national government would be to ban AfriForum, after the lobby group helped secure EFF leader Julius Malema’s five-year prison sentence for firearm offences.
The threat was made outside the KuGompo Magistrate’s Court, formerly East London, shortly after Malema was sentenced on multiple counts relating to his handling and discharge of a firearm at the EFF’s fifth anniversary rally at Sisa Dukashe Stadium in Mdantsane in July 2018.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has made a bold declaration, stating that banning the civil rights organisation AfriForum will be its first act if it assumes power in government. This statement came in the wake of EFF leader Julius Malema receiving a five-year sentence from the KuGompo Magistrate’s Court for unlawful possession of a firearm during a rally in July 2018.
As complainant in the case, AfriForum laid the initial charge after a viral video circulated showing Malema firing several shots into the air from what appeared to be an assault rifle on stage – footage that ultimately formed the backbone of the State’s case.
As a complainant in the case, AfriForum was at the epicentre of the scandal that erupted from a viral video showing Malema firing shots at the EFF’s fifth anniversary celebration at Sisa Dukashe Stadium in Mdantsane.
Outside court, EFF MP and deputy secretary-general Leigh-Ann Mathys accused AfriForum of waging a political campaign against the party and said the organisation would be shut down if the EFF took power.
An EFF Member of Parliament, Leigh-Ann Mathys, voiced the party's sentiments shortly after the sentencing, which involved Malema being found guilty of multiple charges, including the unlawful discharge of a firearm.
“AfriForum is the reason we have been in this court,” said Mathys. “We do not understand why this organisation has not been deregistered in South Africa. At some point during apartheid, the ANC was banned – so why is AfriForum still operating? They spread lies about this organisation. We are not going to tolerate this as EFF. We don’t want them. The EFF has made it clear that once we are in government, the first thing we will do will be to ban AfriForum,” she reiterated.
Her comments came moments after Magistrate Twanet Olivier handed down a sentence that, if upheld on appeal, could see Malema imprisoned and disqualified from serving in Parliament for years.
The sentencing included a five-year prison term for unlawful possession of a firearm, alongside a two-year sentence for unlawful possession of ammunition. Malema was also fined R20,000 for discharging a firearm in a built-up area and an additional R20,000 for failing to take reasonable precautions to ensure safety. The court ordered the latter sentences to run concurrently with the five-year term. Furthermore, the court declared Malema unfit to possess a firearm.
Malema has been granted leave to appeal his sentence but not his conviction, meaning the guilty finding stands unless overturned by a higher court.
AfriForum hits back
AfriForum, which has long been at loggerheads with Malema and the EFF over issues ranging from farm murders to hate-speech cases, rejected Mathys’ accusations of racism and political persecution.
In response, Jacques Broodryk from AfriForum dismissed the claims of racism levelled against the organisation. “If that’s the case, they will have to explain how racism made Mr Malema fire those shots,” he said.
Broodryk framed the judgment as a victory for the principle that even powerful political figures must answer to the law.
Broodryk described the ruling as a confirmation that all individuals, regardless of their political stature, are equal before the law. “Politicians are not above the law. Thursday’s sentence is a win for every law-abiding citizen of this country,” he said.
AfriForum’s involvement as complainant, and its subsequent public celebration of the outcome, have further entrenched its position as one of the EFF’s most bitter opponents. The organisation is likely to use the judgment as proof of what it calls the rule of law prevailing over “revolutionary impunity”, while the EFF is already seeking to turn the case into evidence of a politically weaponised justice system.
NPA hails ruling as affirmation of rule of law
While the political rhetoric escalated outside, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) cast the outcome in strictly legal terms, welcoming the sentence as a reaffirmation that the criminal law applies equally to all, including Members of Parliament.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has welcomed the sentence against Malema.
“The conviction and sentencing of the parliamentarian for the 2018 offences, committed during the EFF’s rally in Mdantsane, is a reaffirmation of the NPA’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and proper administration of justice, without fear, favour or prejudice, regardless of social status and standing,” said Luxolo Tyali, the NPA spokesperson in the Eastern Cape.
The Eastern Cape Director of Public Prosecutions, Barry Madolo, echoed that view, saying the case demonstrated both prosecutorial independence and judicial robustness.
Welcoming the court's decision, the Eastern Cape Director of Public Prosecutions, Barry Madolo, underscored that the sentence exemplifies the principle of equality before the law and the unwavering judicial process in the country.
For the NPA, the case carries symbolic weight: a high-profile politician filmed firing a weapon at a packed stadium, prosecuted and ultimately convicted on multiple counts, including unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, unlawful discharge of a firearm in a built-up area, failure to take precautions and reckless endangerment.
For Malema and the EFF, however, the narrative is different. They argue that the complaint was politically motivated, that AfriForum is a racist organisation targeting black leaders, and that the justice system has been captured by their opponents.
The EFF’s vow to ban AfriForum if it takes power highlights just how central the lobby group has become to the party’s political battles – and raises serious constitutional questions about whether such a move would ever be legally possible in a constitutional democracy that protects freedom of association and expression.
Political and legal stakes
While the sentencing is a criminal law matter, its political implications are unmistakable.
Malema’s status as an MP, his role as EFF commander-in-chief and his national profile mean any custodial sentence – and any subsequent appeal – has to be viewed through both a legal and political lens.
The five-year effective term, coupled with the declaration that he is unfit to possess a firearm, strengthens longstanding criticisms about his apparent disregard for firearms laws and public safety. Yet it also provides fresh ammunition for his narrative that the system is stacked against him and those who challenge the status quo.
AfriForum’s central role as complainant ensures it will remain a lightning rod in this saga. The EFF’s pledge to ban the organisation, while not grounded in current constitutional or statutory powers, signals the extent to which it is prepared to escalate its confrontation with civil society opponents – including through threats that would themselves collide head-on with constitutional rights.
For now, the NPA and AfriForum are treating the judgment as a clear victory for accountability, while the EFF is attempting to transform a criminal sentence into a political rallying point. How voters respond – and how higher courts rule on Malema’s appeal – will determine whether Thursday’s ruling becomes a turning point in his political career, or another chapter in a long-running battle between the courts and one of South Africa’s most combative politicians.
