Duduzile Zuma-Sambudla, the daughter of former South African President Jacob Zuma, is commencing trial this week on terrorism-related charges for her alleged incitement of the July 2021 riots through social media posts. This case represents a pivotal moment in South Africa’s legal and political landscape, drawing widespread attention for its unprecedented nature.
The charges originate from the devastating unrest in July 2021, which erupted after Jacob Zuma was imprisoned for contempt of court. The week-long violence in KwaZulu-Natal and Gauteng provinces left at least 300 people dead and caused an estimated $2.8 billion in damages, marking the worst civil disorder since the end of apartheid. The riots involved widespread looting, arson, and chaos, deeply scarring the nation’s social fabric.
Prosecutors assert that Zuma-Sambudla played a central role in fueling the riots by posting inflammatory content on X, formerly Twitter, where she had approximately 100,000 followers at the time. Her posts included videos of burning vehicles, such as one at Mooi Plaza tollgate, and calls to “shut down” provinces until her father was released. She used hashtags like #FreeJacobZuma and slogans such as “Amandla” (power) and “azishe” (let it burn), which authorities argue incited further violence.
Zuma-Sambudla faces two primary charges: incitement to commit terrorism under the Protection of Constitutional Democracy against Terrorist and Related Activities Act and incitement to commit public violence. She has vehemently denied the allegations, with her lawyer labeling the state’s case as “weak,” and she symbolically wore a shirt reading “Modern Day Terrorist” during a court appearance to mock the accusations. Her defense contends that the posts were merely commentary and not intended to incite illegal acts.
The trial is intensely politicized, given Zuma-Sambudla’s role as a member of parliament for the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party, which her father joined after leaving the African National Congress (ANC). Some analysts and supporters claim the charges are politically motivated, aimed at undermining the Zuma family’s influence. Experts like Prof Bheki Mngomezulu argue that if she weren’t the ex-president’s daughter, the case might have been dropped long ago, highlighting perceptions of selective prosecution.
This case is historic as the first in South Africa to prosecute incitement to terrorism via social media, setting a legal precedent. Willem Els from the Institute for Security Studies notes the high evidentiary bar required to prove intent and causation, with few successful prosecutions under the relevant legislation. The complexity is compounded by the need to distinguish between protected speech and criminal incitement, making the trial a test for the justice system.
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has acknowledged the case’s intricacies, bringing in external social media experts due to limited in-house capabilities. Despite challenges like witness hesitancy and evidence gaps, the NPA appears confident in its case. Meanwhile, the MK party has condemned the prosecution as a “social injustice” and “political ploy,” potentially using the trial to galvanize support and portray Zuma-Sambudla as a martyr.
As the trial unfolds, it is expected to attract significant public and media interest, with implications for South Africa’s political dynamics and the regulation of online speech. The outcome could influence future cases involving social media and public order, while also shaping the trajectory of the Zuma family’s political ambitions and the MK party’s standing in the country.
