As published by Tshepo MATSEBA in the African Times
In a landmark ruling, the Gauteng High Court has sent a clear and powerful message: hate speech, even when disguised as political rhetoric, has no place in public discourse. The case between EFF President Julius Malema and Patriotic Alliance (PA) Deputy President Kenny Kunene, one that has captured the attention of South Africans and beyond, sets an important legal precedent in shaping the standards of communication for politicians and public figures alike. With this judgment, the courts have reasserted their role in safeguarding the dignity of individuals and upholding the values of respect and equality, even when freedom of speech is invoked as a defence.
At the heart of this case lies a critical issue: language. Politicians have long understood the power of words in shaping public perception. Words can unite or divide, heal or harm, uplift or debase. The derogatory use of the term “cockroach” by Kunene to describe Malema was not a mere slip of the tongue; it was a calculated attempt to dehumanise, degrade, and undermine the dignity of an individual.
Become an insider. Subscribe to our newsletter for more top trending stories like this!
While political discourse is often heated and fraught with criticism, the dehumanisation of opponents through inflammatory language crosses a line that should never be crossed. The court’s ruling recognises this, acknowledging that even in a political landscape marked by fierce competition, there are boundaries that must not be violated.
Accountability for Politicians’ Speech
The judgment underscores an undeniable truth: politicians, as trusted public figures, are held to higher standards when it comes to their speech. They are not mere representatives of their parties or movements; they are custodians of the public’s trust. Every word they utter carries weight. Whether on the campaign trail or in the chambers of parliament, their messaging is not just a reflection of their personal views; it is a reflection of the institutions they represent. In this context, the use of derogatory language is not only a personal failing, it is a failure of the institutions and the brand they represent.
Shaping the Political Culture of South Africa
This ruling marks a shift in how we, as a society, should view political rhetoric. While South Africa’s political landscape has always been characterised by passionate debate and robust dialogue, the ruling demonstrates that we must demand more than just heated exchanges. We must expect and insist upon respect for human dignity, regardless of political affiliation.
Language that marginalises, stigmatises, and dehumanises has no place in a democracy that prides itself on its commitment to human rights and equality. Politicians, whether in opposition or power, must engage in a manner that promotes inclusivity rather than division.
The principle of ethical political communication underscores the importance of responsible and transparent communication in the political sphere. Ethical communication calls for a commitment to truth, fairness, and respect for others. It holds that politicians have a responsibility not only to communicate their ideas but also to engage in constructive, respectful, and inclusive dialogue.
In this case, the use of dehumanising language contradicts these ethical principles by undermining the dignity of individuals, perpetuating harmful stereotypes, and contributing to a toxic political environment. The ruling serves as a reminder that political communication should never come at the expense of a person’s dignity or humanity.
The Long-Term Impact of this Ruling
In the aftermath of this ruling, South Africans must reflect on what kind of political culture they want to nurture. Do we want a political environment where insults and inflammatory language become the norm, or do we want a culture of constructive dialogue, where differences are debated based on ideas, not personal attacks? This decision presents an opportunity for politicians to recalibrate their approach to communication, one where the focus shifts from undermining opponents to engaging with them on substantive issues that matter to the people they serve.
Politicians and political parties alike must recognise that their words are not just about winning debates or scoring points. Words are a reflection of their values, their integrity, and their commitment to a society built on principles of fairness and justice. And as this case demonstrates, irresponsible speech comes with consequences, not only legal but reputational. This ruling serves as a reminder that the reputations of public figures and the institutions they represent are fragile and can be irrevocably damaged by careless or malicious remarks.
The Role of Language in Building a Cohesive Society
As South Africa continues to grapple with the challenges of building a cohesive, inclusive society, the role of language in shaping our collective consciousness cannot be overstated. The use of language, particularly in the political arena, has far-reaching consequences, not just for the individuals involved but for society as a whole. When politicians choose words that demean and dehumanise others, they contribute to a culture of hatred and division. When they choose words that uplift, respect, and engage, they contribute to the creation of a more inclusive and just society.
The court’s decision, then, is more than just a victory for Malema — it is a victory for the very ideals that our democratic constitution seeks to protect. It is a victory for human dignity, for the rule of law, and for the fundamental principle that we must all be held accountable for our words and actions.
Become an insider. Subscribe to our newsletter for more top trending stories like this!
The case serves as a reminder that we, as a society, have the power to shape the kind of political discourse we want to see. It is up to us to ensure that the language we use, whether in the public square or behind closed doors, reflects the values of respect, equality, and inclusion that are at the heart of a functioning democracy.
In the end, this ruling should not be seen as a mere legal victory for one individual or one political figure. It is a victory for all South Africans who believe in the power of words to shape a better, more just society. It is a reminder that the words we speak are not just about expressing opinions, they are about upholding our shared values and shaping the future we want to create. It is time for politicians to speak with purpose, with respect, and with a deep awareness of the impact their words have on the reputation of their office, their party, and their country.
This article has been published in partnership with the African Times.
Become an insider. Subscribe to our newsletter for more top trending stories like this!
