Julius Malema triumphs in defamation battle against blogger, Musa Khawula

The Gauteng High Court has ruled that social media commentator Musa Khawula published false, unlawful and defamatory statements about Julius Sello Malema and his wife, Mantoa Matlala Malema, regarding claims about their marriage and alleged divorce proceedings.

The judgment was handed down in the Gauteng Division of the High Court in Johannesburg under case number 2026 053903, in an urgent application brought by Julius Malema and his wife against Khawula. The court found that the statements published by Khawula on social media were not supported by any evidence and had damaged the reputation of the applicants.

According to the court, the claims suggesting that the couple was in the process of divorcing, that allegations of infidelity had been made, and that there were attempts to influence or silence reporting were all false. The court stated that the publications were unlawful and defamatory and ordered that they be withdrawn immediately.

The court ordered Khawula to permanently retract the statements within 24 hour of service of the order. He was also directed to publish a full and unconditional apology on his verified social media account on X, formerly known as Twitter, using his own name, and to ensure that the apology is shared with media outlets and online platforms that had repeated or reported the allegations.

The apology must confirm that the allegations made against the Malema family were false, that no divorce proceedings exist, and that no attempt was made to pay or influence the commentator regarding the claims. The court further required that Khawula acknowledge the harm caused by the publications, including reputational damage and distress to the family.

The court also prohibited Khawula from publishing or repeating any further statements that are similar in nature to the defamatory claims. This interdict applies across all platforms under his control or influence, including social media accounts and messaging channels.

Service of the court order was authorised through substituted service, allowing delivery via electronic mail and social media accounts linked to Khawula. The court recognised that this method was appropriate given the nature of the respondent’s online presence.

On the issue of costs, the court ordered Khawula to pay the legal costs of the Malema family on the attorney and client scale. This is a punitive costs order that requires the losing party to cover a substantial portion of the successful party’s legal fees.

The final amount will be determined through the court taxation process after the legal representatives submit a detailed bill. Legal estimates suggest the total could range from about R200 000 to R600 000 or more, depending on the work assessed by the Taxing Master.

The dispute arose after Khawula posted claims on social media suggesting that the Malema marriage had broken down and that divorce proceedings had been initiated. The posts quickly spread across multiple platforms and were widely shared, prompting coverage and commentary from various online sources and media outlets.

The court noted that the allegations were presented as fact without evidence and had the potential to mislead the public. It emphasised that freedom of expression does not extend to the publication of false and damaging statements about individuals.

The ruling brings an urgent halt to the matter and reinforces the responsibility of social media users to ensure accuracy when making public claims about private individuals and public figures alike.

The court’s order requires immediate compliance within 24 hour of service and warns against any further repetition of the statements in any form.