The courtroom in East London was thick with anticipation this morning as Julius Malema, leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), faced the consequences of his actions after being found guilty in a high-profile legal case.

His trial, which has captivated South Africa’s political sphere, represents more than just a legal battle—it’s a crucial turning point that could reshape the future of Malema’s political career and the EFF’s influence in South African politics.

In 2018, during a speech at the EFF’s 5th anniversary celebration, Malema fired a firearm into the air, an act that was initially seen as political bravado, a display of defiance in the face of authority.

But what seemed like a moment of rebellion has turned into a serious legal issue.

Malema’s defense that the gun was a toy and his dismissal of concerns as political hysteria did little to shield him from the legal consequences.

The East London Magistrate’s Court found him guilty of violating the Firearms Control Act, specifically the unlawful discharge of a firearm and illegal possession.

This guilty verdict, delivered in 2025, shifted the ground beneath Malema’s feet.

For the first time in his career, he was no longer the fearless leader challenging the system—he was facing the consequences of his actions.

The sentencing phase of the trial now holds immense significance.

Legal experts have warned that Malema faces a potential sentence of up to 15 years, depending on the court’s assessment of the seriousness of the offense and the broader implications for society.

The EFF, anticipating the severity of the moment, has mobilized its supporters to rally behind their leader, framing the case as politically motivated and a direct attack on Malema’s outspoken criticism of the ruling ANC.

However, the law is indifferent to political narratives.

According to South Africa’s constitution, any member of parliament convicted of a crime and sentenced to more than 12 months in prison loses their parliamentary seat.

This could spell the end of Malema’s political career in formal government, as he would be barred from holding public office for at least five years after serving his sentence.

Political analyst Andre Duvenh believes that this is the greatest challenge Malema has faced, a moment where the EFF’s once unstoppable momentum could come to a screeching halt.

The EFF’s rise has been built around Malema’s confrontational style, but recent developments suggest cracks in his dominance.

His influence has waned, especially with the rise of the MK party, a new opposition force that has siphoned off attention and support from the EFF.

Rallies that once drew stadium-sized crowds are becoming rarer, and the sense of inevitability surrounding Malema’s political power is starting to fade.

The departure of senior EFF leaders has also raised concerns about the party’s future leadership and succession plans.

The pre-sentencing hearings have brought these issues to the forefront.

Malema’s legal team is expected to argue for a sentence that avoids imprisonment, possibly seeking a fine or a suspended sentence, allowing Malema to retain his seat in parliament.

However, the court will consider the message this would send to society, especially in a country struggling with gun violence.

The nature of the offense, the potential for future violence, and the public interest will all weigh heavily on the court’s decision.

Malema’s supporters argue that the gun discharge was part of a political celebration, with no intention to harm.

They believe the prosecution is disproportionate, and that this is a calculated attempt to neutralize Malema’s radical voice.

On the other hand, critics assert that no one, regardless of their political stance, should be above the law.

Firing a weapon in a crowd, whether intentionally or not, is a reckless act that jeopardizes public safety.

The legal battle now hinges on the court’s interpretation of the offense.

While Malema has no previous criminal record in this context, the court must consider the broader context of his actions.

In a country where firearms contribute to daily violence, a lenient sentence could be seen as sending the wrong message about accountability and the rule of law.

South Africa’s past with illegal firearms, violence, and insecurity makes the unlawful discharge of a firearm by a political leader a significant legal and moral issue.

As the case progresses, the future of Malema and the EFF will be shaped by the court’s decision.

If the sentence exceeds one year, Malema will lose his parliamentary seat, and the EFF will face a future without its leader at the center of its power.

This would be a major blow to the party, which is built around Malema’s personality and political charisma.

The loss of his seat could signal the end of Malema’s career as a national political figure, although analysts suggest he may continue to be a force in South African politics through alternative strategies, such as grassroots mobilization and media appearances.

The courtroom, once a place of political theater for Malema, now represents the final test for his political future.

The stakes have never been higher for the EFF leader, and the outcome of the sentencing could mark the end of his dominance in South African politics.

The trial, which has captivated the nation, will also test the country’s legal system.

Can it apply the law impartially, or will political influence overrule justice?