The Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) of South Africa has made a significant ruling on the use of racist language in private conversations, finding that such language can be considered hate speech. In a unanimous judgment on October 7, 2026, the court upheld a R500,000 order against businessman Willem Hendrik Ackerman for his repeated use of the k-word in private conversations. The court's decision emphasizes that the inherently racist and hateful character of the k-word is not changed by the circumstances of a conversation.
The case involved three communications made by Ackerman between January 2018 and October 2021, which were found to constitute hate speech under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The communications included a WhatsApp message in which Ackerman expressed "homicidal contempt" and referred to black people using the k-word. The court found that these statements were not protected by Ackerman's constitutional rights to privacy and freedom of expression.
Ackerman, a white South African, had argued that the communications were private and therefore protected by his constitutional rights. However, the court rejected this defense, finding that the communications fell outside Ackerman's "intimate personal sphere" and were therefore subject to the provisions of the Equality Act. The court's judgment also noted that previous court findings had described the k-word as carrying "inescapably racist" and derogatory connotations.
The SCA's ruling was based on a consideration of previous court findings about the meaning of the k-word, as well as the definition of hate speech under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act. The court found that hate speech involves communication based on a prohibited ground that could reasonably be construed as demonstrating a clear intention to be harmful or to incite harm and to promote or propagate hatred.
The court's decision also addressed Ackerman's argument that the fact that the communications were between two white men meant they could not amount to hate speech against black people. However, the SCA held that the identity of the persons or party to whom the k-word or other communication is made has no bearing on whether the k-word constitutes hate speech.
The Equality Court had initially ordered Ackerman to pay R500,000 to the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation, make a public apology to Amaning and Wellman, undergo 50 hours of racial sensitization training, and pay their legal costs on an attorney-and-client scale. The SCA's ruling upholds these remedies, emphasizing that the use of racist language can have serious consequences.
The SCA's judgment is a significant step in the fight against hate speech in South Africa, emphasizing that the use of racist language is not acceptable, even in private conversations. The court's decision sends a strong message that the use of such language can have serious consequences, and that it is essential to promote a culture of respect and inclusivity.
Key points
- The Supreme Court of Appeal has ruled that private conversations can be considered hate speech, upholding a R500,000 order against a businessman for using the k-word.
- The court's decision emphasizes that the inherently racist and hateful character of the k-word is not changed by the circumstances of a conversation.
- The ruling sends a strong message that the use of racist language is not acceptable, even in private conversations.
