The high court in Johannesburg has ordered Fikile Mbalula and Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma to proceed to oral evidence in their defamation battle over allegations of vote-buying. The ruling means Mbalula, the ANC secretary-general, will have to face Dlamini-Zuma in court to resolve their competing versions of events surrounding the ANC's 2022 elective conference at Nasrec. The court found that there was a genuine dispute of fact that could not be resolved in the papers.
Mbalula sued Dlamini-Zuma for defamation after she accused him of using money to secure his election as ANC secretary-general at the conference. However, Dlamini-Zuma has refused to retract the allegations, insisting that she will defend her claims about the alleged use of money to influence delegates. The pair faced off in the Johannesburg high court last week, with acting judge Henno Viljoen making the ruling.
The court has several options when confronted with a genuine dispute of fact, including dismissing the application with costs, ordering the parties to trial, or directing that oral evidence be heard on specified issues. Viljoen found that the dispute could be resolved through oral evidence because the relevant witnesses could be identified. The witnesses include Mbalula, Dlamini-Zuma, and Themba Sibiya, an unemployed man who claims to have witnessed and participated in the alleged vote-buying scheme.
Sibiya's affidavit has been rejected by Mbalula, who says he does not know him, has never met him, and did not give him money at the conference. Mbalula's legal team also criticised Sibiya's account, arguing that Dlamini-Zuma did not mention him during an interview and that his affidavit did not specify a date, time, or amount allegedly exchanged. Mbalula also argued that Sibiya's version contradicted Dlamini-Zuma's account on the location of the alleged transaction.
Viljoen ordered that the application for oral evidence be delivered at least 15 court days before the date fixed for the hearing, unless the court allowed a shorter period. The ruling means Mbalula's bid for an immediate retraction and apology has been put on hold while the court hears oral evidence on the disputed allegations. Mbalula had launched the application on an urgent basis, seeking an order declaring the allegations false and defamatory and compelling Dlamini-Zuma to retract them and apologise.
Dlamini-Zuma opposed the application, arguing that it lacked urgency and that Mbalula had failed to exhaust internal remedies available to him under the ANC constitution. She says her defence is based on truth and public interest, while also arguing that the affidavits disclose a genuine dispute of fact that cannot be resolved without oral evidence. The court will now hear oral evidence from the parties to determine the validity of the allegations.
The outcome of the case will have significant implications for both Mbalula and Dlamini-Zuma, as well as the ANC as a whole. The party has been plagued by infighting and allegations of corruption, and the court's decision will likely be closely watched by members and supporters. The case will continue with the hearing of oral evidence, with the court expected to make a final determination on the matter.
Key points
- The high court in Johannesburg has ordered Fikile Mbalula and Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma to proceed to oral evidence in their defamation battle over allegations of vote-buying.
- Mbalula's bid for an immediate retraction and apology has been put on hold while the court hears oral evidence on the disputed allegations.
- The case will continue with the hearing of oral evidence, with the court expected to make a final determination on the matter.
