By Marcus Moloko
Julius Malema walked out of the East London Magistrate’s Court on Thursday with a five-year prison sentence hanging over his head, buying time through an appeal but not escaping a ruling that could still upend his parliamentary future and jolt the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) before local government elections.
The party’s president was sentenced to five years for unlawful possession of a firearm and two years for unlawful possession of ammunition.
Malema was found guilty last year on five charges stemming from the firing of a rifle at the EFF’s 2018 anniversary rally.
ALSO READ: WATCH: Ramaphosa addresses SA – Spain Business Forum in Madrid
He was also fined on three other counts, including discharging a firearm in a built-up area, with the sentences running concurrently to an effective five years.
The most immediate political fact was not the sentence itself, but that Malema did not go to jail.
The court granted him leave to appeal the sentence and released him on warning, allowing him to remain free while the case moves to the High Court and potentially further if he continues the fight.
ALSO READ: Malema denied appeal on firearm conviction, granted leave to challenge sentence
Malema has said he is prepared to take the matter as far as the Constitutional Court.
What Malema did not secure was relief from the conviction. The finding of guilt still stands for now.
The Constitution of the Republic disqualifies anyone sentenced to more than 12 months in prison without the option of a fine from serving in the National Assembly. But the same provision also makes clear that a person is not regarded as having been sentenced until any appeal against conviction or sentence has been determined, or the time for appeal has expired.
That legal distinction gives Malema breathing room, but not certainty.
ALSO READ: Malema sentenced to five years for firearm conviction
The Constitutional Court said in the Zuma eligibility case that Section 47(1)(e) contains both a substantive disqualification and a procedural proviso, with the proviso deciding when the disqualification actually becomes operational. It also held that the disqualification ends five years after the sentence has been completed.
The release itself should not be misunderstood as some automatic legal shield. The Criminal Procedure Act says the execution of sentence is not suspended unless the court releases the convicted person, including on bail or warning. In Malema’s case, he was released on warning, meaning he left court without paying bail but subject to future court attendance.
Politically, the ruling lands at a difficult moment for the EFF.
The party is South Africa’s fourth-largest, with roughly 10% of seats in the National Assembly.
That does not mean the EFF is suddenly leaderless or electorally crippled.
For now, Malema remains free, remains in Parliament, and remains central to his party’s identity.
But the court has changed the balance of his politics.
His legal troubles are no longer a background controversy. They now sit squarely in the middle of the EFF’s electoral calculations, and the appeal process will decide whether this becomes another defiant chapter in Malema’s career or the start of a far more serious political reckoning.