The State has argued that Julius Malema’s firearm convictions should stand, saying his actions at the EFF’s fifth birthday celebration were planned and deliberate.

Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions, Advocate Joel Sesar, made the argument in papers opposing Malema’s bid to appeal his convictions.

Malema was convicted in October on five firearm-related counts linked to an incident at Sisa Dukashe Stadium in Mdantsane on 28 July 2018.

The case centres on claims that Malema fired shots during the event, where thousands of EFF supporters were gathered.

What Malema was Convicted of

The charges included unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful possession of ammunition and unlawful discharge of a firearm in a built-up area.

He was also convicted of failing to take reasonable steps to avoid danger to people or property and reckless endangerment.

In April, Magistrate Twanet Olivier sentenced Malema to five years in prison on one count, two years on another and fines of R20,000 or six months’ imprisonment on each of the remaining counts.

The sentences were ordered to run at the same time, meaning Malema faces an effective five-year sentence.

Olivier granted Malema leave to appeal his sentence but refused leave to appeal his convictions. Malema then approached the Makhanda High Court, asking for leave to challenge the convictions.

State Says Conduct was Not Accidental

Sesar argued that Malema’s conduct was not spontaneous or accidental.

He said the firearm had allegedly been transported from Gauteng to the Eastern Cape for the event and that Malema knew how to handle firearms.

The State also relied on video footage from the event and ballistics evidence. According to the State’s case, footage showed Malema firing 15 shots from a handgun and later firing seven shots from a rifle.

A spent cartridge case was also found at the stadium two days later. Ballistics evidence linked it to a .223 Norinco semi-automatic rifle.

Malema Denies Using Real Firearm

Malema’s defence was that he used a toy gun during the event. He told the court that the alleged firearm was a prop used for showmanship.

Sesar rejected this version and argued that the evidence showed a real firearm was used.

Malema also raised several arguments in his petition, including claims about the interpretation of possession under the Firearms Control Act and the admission of viral video footage.

The State dismissed these arguments and said there was no reasonable prospect that another court would reach a different conclusion.

Judgment will be delivered in chambers.