The bitter fallout from the death of 19-year-old Nhlamulo Sambo has escalated into a court battle after March and March movement leader Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma launched legal proceedings against Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) MP Naledi Chirwa accusing her of spreading defamatory allegations that falsely linked the movement and its leader to the teenager’s killing.
Court papers filed at the Johannesburg high court on July 21 show that Ngobese-Zuma is seeking an order compelling Chirwa to retract the allegedly defamatory statements, publish a written apology and provide a written undertaking that she will not repeat them.
She also wants the court to protect her rights to dignity, safety, security and reputation, arguing that the continued circulation of the posts has caused ongoing harm that cannot be adequately remedied by damages alone.
The application stems from events that unfolded in early June following Sambo’s fatal stabbing in Mossel Bay, a killing that ignited a national debate over xenophobia, Afrophobia and political rhetoric surrounding immigration.
According to Ngobese-Zuma’s founding affidavit, Chirwa republished a Facebook post authored by Temaswati Nqobile Dlamini on June 1 alleging that Sambo’s death was the result of xenophobia and Afrophobia.
Chirwa allegedly accompanied the repost with comments suggesting that Ngobese-Zuma was “jumping for joy” over the teenager’s death and accusing her movement of promoting rhetoric that had culminated in bloodshed.
The affidavit further alleges that Chirwa later stated publicly that she would continue “telling the truth” despite criticism.
Ngobese-Zuma argues that the publications conveyed to ordinary readers that she and the March and March movement were directly responsible for Sambo’s death, severely tarnishing her reputation and exposing her to public hatred.
She contends that those allegations were false because the South African Police Service (SAPS) announced on June 2 that preliminary investigations found no evidence that Sambo’s murder was motivated by his nationality.
Despite that clarification, Ngobese-Zuma alleges Chirwa repeated the same narrative during a speech in parliament, where she again linked the killing to xenophobia and tribalism.
“The respondent has stated publicly that she will not apologise despite the truth about the death of Mr Nhlamulo Sambo coming to light,” Ngobese-Zuma says in her affidavit.
She argues that the publications have caused lasting reputational harm, generated hostile comments and threats against her, and undermined her standing both as an individual and as the leader of March and March.
“The statements have had a damaging impact on myself as an individual as well as on me as a public figure and founder of March and March movement,” she says.
“They have attracted hostile comments, threats and public condemnation from members of the public who have been misled by the false statements of the respondent.”
Ngobese-Zuma further argues that financial compensation would not adequately restore her reputation because the alleged defamatory statements continue to circulate on social media, causing ongoing harm each time they are republished or shared.
Before approaching the high court Zuma and Partners Incorporated sent Chirwa a letter of demand on June 11 requiring her to remove the publications, issue a written apology, retract the statements and undertake not to repeat them.
The attorneys warned that failure to comply would result in legal proceedings seeking an interdict and damages for defamation and impairment of dignity.
In the letter, Ngobese-Zuma’s lawyers argued that Chirwa had falsely created the impression that Sambo’s death resulted from xenophobia and Afrophobia allegedly encouraged by March and March’s campaign against illegal immigration.
They maintained that Chirwa ignored the SAPS statement rejecting claims that the killing was motivated by the victim’s nationality and instead continued advancing the allegations through social media and parliament.
According to the lawyers, the publications falsely suggested that Ngobese-Zuma had either caused or celebrated Sambo’s death, exposing her to ridicule, hatred and threats to her personal safety.
Chirwa, however, has refused to back down.
In a detailed response dated June 13, her attorneys rejected every material allegation contained in the letter of demand and indicated that the EFF MP would oppose any legal proceedings.
The attorneys also questioned whether Ngobese-Zuma had properly identified herself in the correspondence before dismissing the claims as legally unsustainable.
Central to Chirwa’s defence is the argument that much of the complaint relates to statements made during parliamentary proceedings.
Her legal team contends that section 58 of the constitution, together with the Powers, Privileges and Immunities of Parliament and Provincial Legislatures Act, protects MPs from civil liability for statements made during parliamentary debates.
The attorneys argue that any reliance on parliamentary speeches is therefore legally incompetent and cannot form the basis of a defamation claim.
They further argue that Chirwa’s Facebook posts amounted to political expression on issues of immense public importance, including xenophobia, Afrophobia, tribalism, immigration and the public response to Sambo’s death.
According to the response, the publications constituted political opinion and fair comment rather than factual assertions that Ngobese-Zuma personally committed a criminal offence.
The attorneys also dispute Ngobese-Zuma’s interpretation of the posts, arguing that a reasonable reader would not understand them as accusing her of directly causing Sambo’s death but rather as criticism of her political rhetoric and public campaigning.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.