Nelson Mandela Foundation Trust and Another v Afriforum NPC and Others (EQ02/2018) [2019] ZAEQC 2; [2019] 4 All SA 237 (EqC); 2019 (10) BCLR 1245 (EqC) ; 2019 (6) SA 327 (GJ) (21 August 2019)
The court held that the dominant meaning of the Old South African flag is one of apartheid, white supremacy, and racial oppression. The gratuitous display of the Old Flag, outside genuine journalistic, academic, or artistic contexts, is deeply hurtful, harmful, and dehumanising to black South Africans and others who suffered under apartheid. Section 10 of the Equality Act must be interpreted broadly to include all forms of expression, including symbols, not just words, in line with constitutional values and international law. The display of the Old Flag constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act. Such display is not protected by freedom of...
- Citation
- [2019] ZAEQC 2
- Parties
- Applicant: Nelson Mandela Foundation Trust; Applicant: The South African Human Rights Commission; Respondent: Afriforum NPC; Respondent: Minister of Justice and Correctional Services; Respondent: Department of Justice and Correctional Services; Applicant: Johannesburg Pride NPC; Respondent: Federasie Van Afrikaanse Kultuurvereniging NPC
- Court
- Equality Court
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 21 August 2019
- Case Number
- EQ 02/2018
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Application / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Application granted. The gratuitous display of the Old South African flag constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act.
- Judges
- Mojapelo DJP
- Legal Topics
- Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act, Hate Speech, Freedom of Expression, Unfair Discrimination, Harassment, Bill of Rights Limitation
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Nelson Mandela Foundation Trust
Applicant
The South African Human Rights Commission
Applicant
Afriforum NPC
Respondent
Minister of Justice and Correctional Services
Respondent
Department of Justice and Correctional Services
Respondent
Johannesburg Pride NPC
Applicant
Federasie Van Afrikaanse Kultuurvereniging NPC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Application / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the gratuitous display of the Old South African flag constitute hate speech under section 10 of the Equality Act?
- 2 Does such display amount to unfair discrimination and harassment under sections 7 and 11 of the Equality Act?
- 3 Is section 10 of the Equality Act unconstitutional for limiting hate speech to 'words' only?
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the dominant meaning of the Old South African flag is one of apartheid, white supremacy, and racial oppression. The gratuitous display of the Old Flag, outside genuine journalistic, academic, or artistic contexts, is deeply hurtful, harmful, and dehumanising to black South Africans and others who suffered under apartheid. Section 10 of the Equality Act must be interpreted broadly to include all forms of expression, including symbols, not just words, in line with constitutional values and international law. The display of the Old Flag constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act. Such display is not protected by freedom of...
Court Disposition
Application granted. The gratuitous display of the Old South African flag constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act.
Orders
- It is determined that the display of the Old South African flag at the 'Black Monday' demonstrations on 30 October 2017 constituted hate speech, unfair discrimination on the basis of race, and harassment under the Equality Act.
- Any gratuitous display of the Old Flag, subject to the section 12 proviso, constitutes hate speech, unfair discrimination, and harassment under the Equality Act.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment