The Gauteng High Court issued an arrest warrant for Ngizwe Mchunu after finding the South African cultural activist in contempt of court.
The ruling underscores the legal boundaries of public discourse in South Africa, specifically regarding allegations of corruption and criminal associations involving high-profile political figures.
The legal dispute centered on remarks Mchunu made in April 2026. Mchunu alleged that Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema was protecting undocumented migrants and had received a payment of R60 million [1] from Nigerian drug money. The court determined these claims were defamatory and lacked lawful justification.
On May 12, 2026 [2], the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria ruled that Mchunu had defamed Malema [3]. The court ordered Mchunu to issue a public apology for the statements. Following the ruling, the court found Mchunu in contempt and authorized the warrant for his arrest [4].
Reports on Mchunu's compliance with the court's orders have been contradictory. Some reports indicate that Mchunu issued a last-minute apology to Malema [5], while other accounts state that Mchunu said he would not apologize [5].
Mchunu has previously said to the court that he possesses evidence to support his claims that Malema protects illegal immigrants [6]. However, the judiciary found these assertions insufficient to justify the public statements made by the media personality.
“The Gauteng High Court issued an arrest warrant for Ngizwe Mchunu”
This case highlights the tension between cultural activism and defamation laws in South Africa. By issuing an arrest warrant for contempt, the court is signaling a low tolerance for unfounded allegations of criminal bribery—specifically the R60 million claim—when they are presented as fact without judicial evidence.
