No Complaints Came Forward, Defence Argues in Malema Firearm Case

The defence in the firearm discharge case involving Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema has argued that no one came forward to complain about the incident during the party’s 2018 anniversary celebration.

Advocate Shane Matthews, representing Malema’s co-accused Adriaan Snyman, made this point during closing arguments at the East London Magistrate’s Court on Monday.

Malema and Snyman stand accused of firing a gun in public during the EFF’s anniversary rally. Both have pleaded not guilty, with Malema telling the court that the firearm in question was a toy and not a real weapon. Matthews stressed that the state had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

The defence lawyer challenged the State’s evidence, which largely relied on a video obtained from social media that allegedly showed Malema firing the weapon. Matthews said the prosecution had no other proof that Snyman had handed a firearm to Malema.

“What is remarkable is that out of the estimated 30,000 people who attended the event, not one individual has come forward to testify or lodge a complaint about the firearm incident,” Matthews said.

He went on to describe the nature of the event, emphasising that the EFF is a registered political party with the right to hold public celebrations. Matthews argued that the party did not simply show up and start the gathering spontaneously.

“A joint operation command was in place before the event began. This included various police divisions and paramedics. The crowd size was between 20,000 and 30,000 people who attended the celebration,” he explained.

Matthews noted that many prominent figures were present at the event and yet, despite the large attendance, no witness came forward after the event to raise concerns or file a complaint about the firearm being discharged.

“Instead, it was the police who found the video on social media, which they say shows Malema firing a gun into the air. That video became the basis for launching the investigation. In this case, the police themselves are acting as the complainant,” he added.

The defence further argued that no evidence was presented to show that the firearm was loaded or that it posed a danger to the public. The state also admitted it could not prove that Snyman handed any firearm to Malema.

“In fact, the state now suggests that Snyman was just as surprised as everyone else on stage when the gun was discharged,” Matthews said. He pointed out that there was no proof of any physical harm or damage caused by live ammunition during the event.

The trial has attracted significant attention due to Malema’s high profile as leader of the EFF and the political implications of the case. Malema has consistently maintained his innocence throughout the proceedings.

The court hearing on Monday marked the conclusion of closing arguments. The case was then postponed, with the judgment expected on the 29th of September 2025.

Observers continue to follow the case closely, as it raises important questions about public safety, political expression, and the role of social media as evidence in legal proceedings.

As the judgment date approaches, both the prosecution and defence await the magistrate’s decision on whether the evidence presented suffices to uphold the charges or if Malema and Snyman will be acquitted.