Malema has right to express himself, but ‘should provide proof for his remarks’

“You can Voetsek small bedwetting boys (sic).” This was Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema’s defiant response to the department of justice and correctional services, under Minister Ronald Lamola, which expressed “great concern” over Malema’s “vitriolic attack” on magistrate Twanet Olivier.

Malema had called Olivier’s ruling in his firearm case a “sponsored judgment”. He vowed he would continue to say whatever he wanted about judges and magistrates as they were not god, nor were they immune to criticism and as long as he was in parliament, he would have a seat on the Judicial Service Commission (JSC).

ALSO READ: Malema’s attack on magistrate condemned

“Who adjourns the court during judgment to go backseat and receive Pravin Gordhan’s call, and receives [Cyril] Ramaphosa’s call and receives [national director of public prosecutions at the National Prosecuting Authority Shamila] Batohi’s call?

“When she comes back to give her judgment she’s shaking like hell because it’s not her judgment, it’s a sponsored judgment,” Malema said after his court appearance.

‘You can voetsek!’

Judiciary watchdog Judges Matter also condemned his actions, to which Malema responded: “You can voetsek!”

His remarks are seen as problematic because he sits on the JSC, which interviews judges.

ALSO READ: ‘They will get it in hell,’ Malema says to demand for apology to East London magistrate

Mpumelelo Zikalala of Zikalala Attorneys said the EFF leader was wrong to voice his frustration in this manner. Zikalala said if Malema believed the magistrate had done something wrong, he should have filed an official complaint.

“Everyone will have an opinion on the presiding officer, whether it’s a judge or magistrate, but the most important thing is to complain in the correct forum.

“In the normal course of business, judges are in the business of making people both happy and sad with [their] judgments,” he said.

“I have no problem with complaining but if you are going to cast aspersions on someone and say somebody else is fuelling the way, you are deciding, you are attacking the way she works, not the substance of whether they are wrong or right in their adjudication.

“Making allegations that her mind was influenced by external factors amounts to fraud, gross incompetence. You must substantiate. If there’s evidence then provide it.”

ALSO READ: WATCH: Malema claims ruling in gun charges case ‘sponsored judgment’

Zikalala added that because Malema was a public official, he had a duty to lead by example.

“One of the things is to say, in instances where I am not happy about a government institution, I must be an example of how you complain to get justice. The mudslinging is not going to assist anyone. It is not going to assist him in the case.”

Malema must prove allegations

But political analyst Prof Sipho Seepe said one of the fundamental errors made after the 1994 dispensation was to put the judiciary on a pedestal.

“Malema has every right to express himself as a citizen of this country. One hopes that those taking umbrage at his remarks use facts to disprove him. He also should provide proof for the remarks,” he said.

ALSO READ: Court denies Malema’s bid to have gun charges withdrawn

Another political analyst, Dr Levy Ndou, said Malema’s comments were typical of him and that he was well aware that he might not be taken to task, other than having to make an apology.

“As a member of parliament, his role is to make laws and the judges and magistrates have to apply those laws. You need such people to have a collegial and harmonious working relationship. It’s difficult to talk about the insults because that talks to the character of a person,” he said.

No apology

Malema said there was nothing wrong with what he had said and he would not apologise.

“Judges are not the constitution, a magistrate is not the constitution. She, too, is the subject of the constitution. She must respect the constitution. I don’t care about her feelings, I care about what the law says. I have no responsibility to nurse her feelings,” he said.

“They tried a concocted charge in parliament that I said things about judges. I will never stop talking about judges because they are not judge gods.

“They are individuals and that’s why their judgments are appealed and can be reversed – because they are human and they make mistakes.”

– lungam@citizen.co.za