MAKHANDA – Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema has filed a petition in the Makhanda High Court seeking leave to appeal his convictions on five firearm-related offences, as well as the five-year direct imprisonment sentence handed down earlier this year.

This is according to EWN, which reported that the application has been lodged as Malema seeks to challenge both his conviction and sentence.

Malema was convicted on charges including unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, the discharge of a firearm in a built-up area, and reckless endangerment of property.

The charges fall under provisions of the Firearms Control Act 60 of 2000, which regulates the possession, handling and discharge of firearms in South Africa.

He was sentenced on 16 April to five years’ imprisonment by Magistrate Twanet Olivier in the East London Regional Court after being found guilty on multiple firearm-related offences.

He was also fined R20 000 for discharging a firearm in a built-up area, R20 000 for failing to take reasonable precautions to protect persons or property, and R20 000 for reckless endangerment.

He faces an alternative six-month prison term should the fines not be paid.

Malema was further declared unfit to possess a firearm and ordered to surrender any firearms in his possession to police authorities.

The convictions stem from an incident at an EFF rally held in Mdantsane on 28 July 2018, where Malema allegedly fired celebratory shots at an event attended by more than 200 people.

ALSO READ: Malema and His Impact on South African Politics

During proceedings, Magistrate Olivier rejected the defence’s characterisation of the incident as “celebratory shots,” stating that the discharge of a semi-automatic firearm in a crowded public space could not be minimised. She described the defence’s argument as “nothing more than sugarcoating.”

Malema’s senior counsel, Advocate Laurence Hodes, argued that there was no evidence of injuries, property damage or public panic arising from the incident, and said the court had placed undue weight on the perceived seriousness of the conduct. Hodes further submitted that the court conflated legal reasoning with broader social and political commentary, which he said was inappropriate at the sentencing stage.

Following the ruling, Malema addressed supporters outside court, saying the judgment had failed to properly engage with key arguments raised by the defence. He alleged that parts of his submissions were not adequately considered and suggested the proceedings were influenced by improper considerations, claims he said would be pursued through formal channels.

As previously reported by Nova News, Malema also made remarks in which he accused Magistrate Olivier of bias during his address to supporters.

The convictions and sentence have intensified scrutiny of Malema’s political conduct and leadership. Under Section 47(1)(e) of the Constitution, a person is disqualified from serving as a Member of Parliament if sentenced to 12 months or more imprisonment without the option of a fine, regardless of whether the sentence is suspended.

Malema remains out on warning pending the outcome of the appeal process.

ALSO READ: Malema’s political future at stake as he returns to court in firearm discharge case