Cape Town – ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula and ANC NEC member Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma will have to give oral evidence in their defamation dispute over allegations that money was used to influence the party’s 2022 leadership elections.
The Johannesburg High Court ordered the pair to make themselves available for cross-examination after finding that their competing versions could not be resolved on the court papers.
According to TimesLIVEthat the ruling means Mbalula’s bid for an immediate retraction and apology has been put on hold while the court hears oral evidence.
Acting Judge Henno Viljoen said the central issue was whether Mbalula distributed money to delegates at or around the ANC’s 55th National Conference at Nasrec between 16 and 20 December 2022 to influence the outcome of the leadership elections.
“The affidavits disclose a real, genuine and bona fide dispute of fact upon a material issue, which cannot be satisfactorily determined without the aid of oral evidence,” Viljoen said.
Dlamini-Zuma made the allegations during an interview on the African Renaissance Podcast in August.
She alleged that Mbalula distributed money to delegates at a clinic during the Nasrec conference to secure his election as ANC secretary-general and help Cyril Ramaphosa retain the ANC presidency.
Mbalula has denied the allegations and approached the court seeking declarations that they were false, defamatory and unlawful. He also wanted Dlamini-Zuma ordered to retract the claims and apologise.
IOL reported that Dlamini-Zuma has maintained that her allegations were true and made in the public interest. The publication also reported that the court ordered oral evidence from Mbalula, Dlamini-Zuma and ANC member Mandla Themba Sibiya.
Sibiya is central to Dlamini-Zuma’s case. He has claimed that he witnessed Mbalula distributing money to delegates and that he benefited from the alleged payments.
Daily Maverick previously reported that Sibiya had placed an affidavit before the court in which he claimed to have witnessed and participated in the alleged vote-buying at the 2022 conference.
Mbalula has rejected Sibiya’s account, saying he does not know him and has never given him money.
Mbalula’s lawyers argued that Dlamini-Zuma had no concrete evidence to support her claims, while her legal team relied on Sibiya’s affidavit as evidence of a genuine dispute requiring witnesses to be cross-examined.
Viljoen identified weaknesses in Dlamini-Zuma’s version, including questions about how she obtained some of the information. He also noted a lack of detail in Sibiya’s affidavit.
However, the judge found that those shortcomings were not enough to dismiss the evidence without hearing from the witnesses.
The court found there was a dispute of fact that could only be properly resolved through oral evidence, with Mbalula, Dlamini-Zuma and Sibiya expected to take the stand.
The court has limited the oral hearing to the central allegation concerning the alleged distribution of money to delegates.
If the evidence ultimately favours Mbalula, the court will then consider issues including the alleged harm to his reputation and Dlamini-Zuma’s conduct after the statements were published.
Mbalula’s damages claim was refused in the current application, although the judge said this did not prevent him from pursuing a separate damages claim.
The remaining relief he is seeking, including an interdict and a possible retraction or apology, will be dealt with after the oral evidence.
The judgment does not establish that Mbalula distributed money to delegates. It also does not establish that Dlamini-Zuma’s allegations were true.
Follow African Insider on Facebook, X and Instagram
Picture: X/@MbalulaFikile
For more African news, visit Africaninsider.com
Compiled by Glaan Sibuyi
