It took three days for magistrate Twanet Olivier to deliver judgment in Julius Malema’s firearm trial. "You are found guilty as charged" she declared, convicting the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader on all charges including unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition, discharging a firearm in a public space, and reckless endangerment.

His former bodyguard, Adriaan Snyman, was acquitted.

The matter has been postponed until January 2026 for pre-sentencing.

Malema showed little sign of concern. Addressing supporters outside the East London regional court, he said: "Going to prison or death is a badge of honour. We cannot be scared of prison [or] to die for the revolution. Whatever they want to do, they must know we will never retreat."

The Democratic Alliance (DA) seized on the ruling to sharpen its critique of the EFF. Ian Cameron MP, the DA’s Deputy Spokesperson on Police, said the conviction confirmed what was already clear: "This case is not simply about Malema’s conduct, but also about the culture of chaos, violence, and criminality that the leader of the EFF embodies and promotes."

Cameron added: "Our country’s future cannot be built on bullets and threats. It must be built on the rule of law. Today’s conviction is a step toward reaffirming that principle."

The EFF responded with fury, releasing a lengthy statement that framed the judgment as a politically driven attack. The party said the case, which stemmed from Malema firing a rifle at the EFF’s fifth anniversary rally in 2018: "has been maliciously pursued for more than seven years…not because of compelling evidence, but because of the political agenda driving it."

In that statement, the EFF accused the judiciary of bowing to: "imperialist and right-wing agendas rather than evidence and fairness." It argued that the acquittal of Snyman, accused of handing Malema the weapon, while convicting Malema himself, showed: "this was a witch hunt to target the President of the EFF and find him guilty no matter how irrational it may be."

The party vowed to appeal, saying it trusted higher courts would: "expose the weaknesses and contradictions of this prosecution." It also linked the judgment to what it called a wider pattern of politically motivated cases against Malema, citing previous trials over struggle songs and protests.

Malema’s sentencing, set for January 2026, could be a potential flashpoint in South Africa’s political landscape. Whether it cements the authority of the courts or fuels further confrontation may determine not only Malema’s fate but also how far institutions can hold against the pressures of street politics.