Malema is apparently facing a tough probe from within his party. Internal Economic Freedom Fighters sources claimed that EFF MPs and councillors must pay substantial chunks of their salaries to the party.

Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema is facing a revolt over financial management from party dissidents.

Impeccable sources within our disposal, revealed and  noted with dismay that there was  a “growing discontent” over Malema’s control of money allocated for constituency work and the accounting for this.

 “We don’t get our constituency funding … all the funds are centralised from head office,” a member of the EFF central command team narrated.

Malema’s deputy, Floyd Shivambu, told the the media  that the EFF received funds allocated by Parliament and provincial legislatures and this was accounted for nationally.

Other unnamed EFF leaders confided in the media  that there was unhappiness over the party’s policy that members of Parliament and of the provincial legislatures had to give the party up to 30 percent of their salaries while municipal councillors had to pay up at least 50 percent.

According to the disgruntled faction, the party top leadership should not be a supreme one, rather there should be appropriate, periodic and institutional  checks and balances to engender accountability. They noted that one individual should not be saddled with the ultimate task of leading the party for life, as the party  was nobody’s  private estate.

 Some aggrieved party members/ leaders had this to say:

“How would a colleague have a 13-bedroom house and another a three-bedroom house?” while questioning how some leaders owned paid-up houses and others were “going around getting $10 000 [about R125 000] or €20 000 [about R270 000]”, beyond their state salaries.

“They should start asking questions about those people. It is well beyond what we earn. So this is what I am saying: are our institutions so useless that they are unable to identify some of these things?”  saying that the party had not acted on a previous decision to run lifestyle audits.