Advocate Ngcukaitobi slams “racist” laws banning land grabs:
“Mr Malema today faces the possibility of going to prison not because he beat anybody up, but because he spoke. It is wrong to criminalise land occupation. It is also racist to do so, because the majority of occupiers are black.”
“What we know is that Mr Malema asked for the occupation of vacant land, no specific person is mentioned or targeted. There is not incitement, encouragement or procurement of violence at all.”
“The appropriate response is that where vacant land is seen, it must be occupied. One may disagree with this, one may say it is not the answer but one can never criminalise the speaking of the truth of the matter.”
Advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi went into bat for the political firebrand, who was back in the dock after breaking several interdicts that ban him from endorsing land occupation.
He’s been charged with breaking the Riotous Assemblies Act of 1956, which strictly prohibits calls for citizens to claim land unlawfully.
argument has been to denounce the validity of the law Malema could be prosecuted under. Ngcukaitobi stated that the law was passed and approved during apartheid, and therefore has no bearing in a democratic society.
Not only did they slam the law for inconsistencies, but they blasted it for “prohibiting free speech”. Ngcukaitobi was also keen to stress that Julius Malema and the red berets have only ever called for vacant land to be seized. However, context is a wonderful thing. Looking back over Juju’s calls for land grabs, he has often failed to specify this detail.