Malema warrant of arrest 'procedural' - lawyer
The warrant of arrest issued for Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema is “absolutely normal”, according to his lawyer Ian Levitt.
![[WATCH] Malema does the 'vosho' ahead of swearing-in](https://turntable.kagiso.io/images/EFF_CIC.width-800.jpg)
On Monday, the East London Magistrate's Court issued a warrant of arrest for Malema and his co-accused Adriaan Snyman.
The arrest warrant has been stayed until his next court appearance in May.
Levitt says an arrangement was made with the court in November for Malema not to appear when dockets are handed over due to the costs incurred by the accused and the state.
"It's very costly to fly down all your legal representatives for a postponement when you're out of town. More importantly, the courts would have to employ a whole lot of resources, being the police and court officials and security, to make provision for the appearance of a high-profile accused," says Levitt.
READ: Malema: De Klerk is an 'unrepentant apologist of Apartheid'
"This was by arrangement with the NPA (National Prosecuting Authority) to assist the state, that the state didn't have to employ police officers at the court because of the high-profile person, the place didn't have to be cordoned off for rioters or for protesters or for picketers. This is done for the state. You don’t have to employ all these resources for every single postponement."
Malema and Tactical Security Services owner, Snyman, face possible prosecution after the EFF leader allegedly discharged a firearm in public during the party's fifth birthday celebrations in the Eastern Cape in 2018.
Snyman, who oversees Malema's security, is believed to have handed over the company firearm to Malema.
Levitt adds that it is standard procedure for the court to issue a warrant of arrest, regardless of any arrangements with the court.
"If he does have an excuse (not to appear in court) which was the situation here, it gets held back. What the magistrate did was 100% correct," he explains.
"To say that my client Mr Malema failed to appear in court is absolutely false. This was by agreement that he did not appear in court. The allegation that he 'failed' looks as if he has not regard for the court process and this is false."
Malema is due back in court on May 8.
