State Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan’s Equality Court docket problem in opposition to EFF chief Julius Malema and his deputy Floyd Shivambu has been moved to the South Gauteng Excessive Court docket in Johannesburg.
Angelike Charalambous from Ian Levitt Attorneys, representing Malema and Shivambu, confirmed to Information24 that the matter had been moved to the Excessive Court docket on Monday.
“It was moved to the High Court due to the fact that we raised constitutional dispute in our answering affidavit, and the magistrate’s court doesn’t have jurisdiction to do deal with that,” she mentioned.
Charalambous mentioned no date had been set for the matter to be heard but.
Final week the matter was postponed pending an utility by all three events for the matter to be moved to the Excessive Court docket.
Malema and Shivambu, via their lawyer, advocate Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, informed the Johannesburg Justice of the Peace’s Court docket that they wish to problem Part 10 of the Equality Act.
The part offers with hate speech.
In November final 12 months, Gordhan lodged complaints in opposition to Malema and Shivambu.
This was after Malema referred to Gordhan as a “dog of white monopoly capital” whereas addressing a crowd exterior the fee of inquiry into state seize in November 2018.
Gordhan was on the time testifying earlier than the fee.
A easy case
Malema additional informed EFF members and supporters that they need to be “ready for war” in opposition to the minister.
He additionally took purpose at Gordhan’s daughter, Anisha Gordhan, saying she had allegedly been awarded contracts by Nationwide Treasury and different authorities departments, seemingly on account of her father’s place in authorities.
Shivambu accused Gordhan and his daughter of being corrupt.
Gordhan’s lawyer Tebogo Malatji mentioned though the matter was now moved to the Excessive Court docket, they noticed it as “a simple case”.
“From where we are sitting, the next steps are for the High Court to receive the file from the magistrate’s court and for a judge to be allocated to the matter and issue direction,” Malatji mentioned.
Malatji mentioned all they sought was a ruling that may state whether or not what Malema and Shivambu mentioned in regards to the minister constituted hate speech or not.