Malema’s Comments Against The Guptas Are Beyond Campaign, They Are Threats! – Judge

Advertisement

The legal representative of the Guptas family said Economic Freedom Fighters hate speech on Guptas workers suggests a heavy threat to the family. The judge Johan Louw, who buttressed the reasons why the interdiction against Malema still stands stated this. He said,

“No reasonable and right-thinking person would consider the statement not to be a threat of violence and that the respondents were merely campaigning for the upcoming elections.”

“…they don’t allege that any violence has been committed by any of the respondents. Their case is that in view of the statements which have been made, their right not to be threatened with violence has been infringed and that they have a reasonable apprehension that violence will be committed against them.”

Read Also: 8.3 Million Jobless South Africans Neglected; Zuma Must Resign! – DA

Since the EFF was unable to convince the chief judge Johan Louw that the threats they issued against the politically connected family were just “political campaigning” and not an incitement to violence, they were interdicted from participating in any conduct promoting the removal of the Guptas from Gauteng or South Africa.

They were also interdicted from interfering with the activities of journalists from The New Age and ANN7 or preventing them from attending any public political events such as marches, gatherings or meetings by any political party, including EFF activities.

During the court proceeding, EFF’s advocate Ishmael Semenya, argued that there was nothing to show that Malema threatened The Guptas. But rather, Malema’s speech during the party’s briefing was “part of election campaigning”. More so, the speech “was fair comment in a political landscape.”

EFF’s interdiction was handed to them by Pretoria High Court Judge Johan Louw  while EFF was busy singing “Guptas must go”, “Honeymoon is over for Guptas” and “We’ll fight war with war”, and singing “Shoot Zuma, shoot the Guptas” outside Constitutional Court.



The judge also said Malema’s threat- that the “Guptas” must go was overlooked , “otherwise the predictability of what could happen to them and any of their properties becomes a highly volatile matter”.

“No reasonable and right-thinking person would consider the statement not to be a threat of violence and that the respondents were merely campaigning for the upcoming elections.”

“…They don’t allege that any violence has been committed by any of the respondents. Their case is that in view of the statements which have been made, their right not to be threatened with violence has been infringed and that they have a reasonable apprehension that violence will be committed against them,”said  Louw.

It would be recalled that one of the striking evidences provided by the family was court papers tendered by a member of the Guptas family, Nazeem Howa along 12 others, including Ajay, Atul and Rajesh Kumar Gupta –showing that some of their business executives had received threatening phone calls.

However, New Age newspaper boss Moegsien Williams stated it clear that EFF and its leaders has no authority to tackle their workers because ”our employees have the right to go to work and do their jobs without the threat of violence. We welcome today’s ruling.”

Be that as it may, Malema maintained that EFF would continue to vilify the Gupta family. He said, “We must respect the courts. But the courts can’t stop us from saying that we don’t love the Guptas.” “We don’t want their curry.”

See Also: Everything About SONA Proved That South Africa Is Indeed A Confused Banana Republic

 

Topics: