South African opposition politician Julius Malema has been found guilty of illegal possession of a gun and firing it in public, offences which carry a minimum sentence of 15 years in prison.

In 2018, a video emerged showing the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader using a semi-automatic rifle to fire several shots in the air during his party's fifth anniversary celebrations held in the country's Eastern Cape province.

He was charged alongside his former bodyguard Adriaan Snyman, who was acquitted.

Malema was convicted of hate speech less than two months ago, having previously lashed out at the white minority in a country still grappling with the legacy of apartheid.

He was convicted of five offences, including unlawful possession of a firearm and ammunition and discharging it in a public space. These offences, part of the Firearms Control Act, could impose a minimum 15-year sentence.

Malema fired between 14 and 15 live rounds on a stage in front of 20,000 supporters, as reported by SowetanLIVE.

In his defence, he argued that the firearm was not his and claimed the shots were fired to energize the crowd.

The presiding magistrate took three days to announce the verdict: you are found guilty as charged. The case was postponed to January 2026 for pre-sentencing.

Malema, undeterred by the outcome, proclaimed to supporters, Going to prison or death is a badge of honour. We cannot be scared of prison or to die for the revolution. He signalled intentions to challenge the judgement to the Constitutional Court, South Africa's highest legal authority.

The prosecution was initiated by Afrikaner lobby group AfriForum, which emerged with a complex history of opposition against Malema and the EFF following the video's viral spread. Additionally, they were involved in the hate speech case leading to Malema's earlier conviction in August.

Melama’s inflammatory remarks have been a significant source of controversy, with comments advocating for the violent seizure of white-owned land and promoting racial division. His sentiments sow deeper racial tensions within the country.

With the potential for serious prison time, Malema's political future hangs in the balance; under South African law, any sentence exceeding 12 months without an option of fine restricts one from holding a parliamentary position.

Legal insights suggest that Malema may need to present significant evidence demonstrating why he should avoid the minimum sentence of 15 years. Interestingly, the constitution regards a sentence as definitive only once the appeal process has concluded, which raises questions about his future as a public official.