The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has described the National Prosecuting Authority’s sentencing of its leader, Julius Malema, as political. 

The 45-year-old South African politician was on Thursday sentenced to five years in prison for illegal possession of a firearm and shooting in public.

Mr Malema, a staunch follower of the late Winnie Mandela, wife of the late Nelson Mandela — Nobel Peace Prize winner and anti-apartheid activist and politician; is a prominent radical opposition politician in South Africa. 

While sentencing Mr Malema, the magistrate, Twanet Olivier, said the opposition politician deliberately violated firearm laws by shooting a gun in the air at an EFF celebration in 2018.

Mr Malema’s lawyers filed an appeal shortly after the judgment was pronounced.

In reaction to the ruling, in a statement on Thursday, the EFF said the “case has always been pursued in a highly politicized environment, with clear intentions to criminalize a revolutionary political voice that represents the aspirations of the oppressed and marginalized.”

The party said it “notes the imposition of a custodial sentence, which we view as disproportionate and inconsistent with both the facts and the broader context of the incident.”

The EFF said the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), in its pursuit of the matter, “demonstrated an extraordinary and deeply suspicious appetite for imprisonment.

“This is the same prosecuting authority that routinely fails to secure convictions in cases of violent crime, including murder, rape, and armed robbery, where victims suffer irreversible harm. Yet, in a case where no one was injured, the NPA mobilized its full capacity to ensure that President Malema is incarcerated.”

It noted that during the proceedings, the defence, led by a constitutional scholar and advocate, Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, “advanced compelling arguments which exposed the weakness and excesses of the State’s case.”

According to the EFF, Mr Ngcukaitobi noted that there was no intention on the part of Mr Malema to cause harm. 

“The discharge of the firearm occurred in a celebratory context during a political gathering, and not as an act of violence or criminal recklessness. This is consistent with submissions before the court that characterized the act as symbolic and not malicious,” it said.

The party further noted that the defence highlighted the absence of demonstrable harm or injury arising from the incident. 

“No person was harmed, and there was no evidence presented that the conduct resulted in any actual danger beyond speculative assertions,” it added.

The EFF noted that the defense also challenged the proportionality of imprisonment, arguing that a custodial sentence would serve no legitimate purpose of justice, deterrence, or rehabilitation, but would instead amount to the suppression of political dissent.

“Lastly, the defense raised serious concerns about the conduct of the prosecution itself. It was pointed out that Malema’s co-accused, Mr Snyman, who has since been acquitted, had his firearm returned to him by the State even before judgment was delivered. This, the defense argued, stands in stark contradiction to established legal procedure, where such decisions are ordinarily reserved for the presiding judge. The judge herself was unaware of this fact,” the EFF said it its statement. 

According to the EFF, Mr Malema’s lawyer accused the South African government of lacking thoroughness in handling evidence while paradoxically pursuing the harshest possible sentence against Mr Malema.

“Furthermore, the State failed to place before the court the alleged correspondence used to justify this action, deepening concerns about procedural irregularities and lack of transparency.

The EFF is particularly concerned that these well-reasoned arguments were not sufficiently weighed in the final outcome, reinforcing our long-held view that this prosecution has been driven not by a neutral application of the law, but by a desire to make an example of President Malema,” the EFF said.

The EFF alleged that the “prosecution and sentencing cannot be divorced from the broader political environment in which it has unfolded.”

It added, “President Malema has long been the target of sustained campaigns by right-wing organisations such as AfriForum, whose litigation strategy is explicitly aimed at silencing a radical and uncompromising opponent of white supremacy and land dispossession.”

The party also accused the United States President, Donald Trump, of interference in the matter.

“We further note the alarming global dimension of these attacks. Statements by figures such as Donald Trump, who have openly suggested that leaders like President Malema must be dealt with, reflect the alignment of international reactionary forces with local campaigns to neutralise revolutionary Black leadership in South Africa.,” the EFF noted.

The EFF reiterated its solidarity with Mr Malema, encouraging EFF members and supporters to remain calm.