Johannesburg High Court declares Kunene's 'cockroach' slur hate speech

Court rules Kunene's remarks constitute hate speech

A full bench of the High Court in Johannesburg delivered a landmark judgment on Thursday, finding that Kenny Kunene, founder of the Patriotic Alliance, crossed the line of protected political discourse when he labeled Julius Malema, leader of the Economic Freedom Fighters, a "cockroach" on live television in 2021.

The court stated unequivocally that the political use of the term "cockroach" is "always and everywhere a call to treat those to whom the term is directed as objects of hate." It drew a stark parallel with the Rwandan genocide, noting that the word was historically deployed to dehumanise an entire population before mass slaughter.

In its reasoning, the judges stressed that the word carries "genocidal connotations" that push it beyond mere insult. By branding a political opponent as less than human, the language invites exclusion and, potentially, violence. The judgment therefore placed the term squarely within the ambit of hate speech, irrespective of any surrounding context.

During the 2021 broadcast Kunene called Malema a "little frog," an "irritating cockroach," and described the EFF as a "party of criminals." While the Equality Court in 2023 had branded all three descriptors as hateful, the High Court narrowed the scope, concluding that only the word "cockroach" met the legal definition of hate speech.

Implications, reactions and next steps

The court rejected Kunene's claim that his remarks were protected political expression. It reminded the bench that hate‑speech legislation exists to curb social and political debate from devolving into mutual dehumanisation and physical aggression.

However, the judges drew a line at speech that is merely "angry or conveys hostility," ruling that such language does not automatically trigger hate‑speech provisions. This nuance led the court to overturn the Equality Court’s recommendation that the matter be referred to the National Prosecuting Authority for criminal prosecution.

As a remedy, Kunene was ordered to issue an unconditional written and oral apology to Malema and the public at large. The Economic Freedom Fighters hailed the decision as a vindication of their fight against hate‑filled rhetoric, while legal scholars noted the judgment could set a precedent for how South African courts treat dehumanising language in political arenas.

• Key finding: only the term "cockroach" qualifies as hate speech.
• Rejected: claims of political free‑speech protection for the slur.
• Outcome: mandatory public apology, no criminal charges.
• Potential impact: tighter scrutiny of dehumanising language in future political debates.

The ruling arrives at a time when South Africa grapples with a surge in polarising political rhetoric. Observers will be watching closely to see whether this benchmark influences other high‑profile cases involving incendiary language, and how parties adjust their messaging to stay within legal bounds.