A bitter power struggle between two senior ANC figures has spilled into the courts, with the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg reserving judgment in Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula’s defamation case against ANC NEC member Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.
The case centres on explosive allegations that money was used to influence the outcome of the ANC’s 2022 Nasrec elective conference where Mbalula was elected secretary-general and Cyril Ramaphosa secured a second term as party president.
Dlamini-Zuma has stood by her claims that Mbalula distributed money to delegates to secure his position.
Mbalula has vehemently denied the allegations and wants Dlamini-Zuma to retract them and apologise.
His legal team argued that there was no concrete evidence proving that he bought votes, with Advocate Smanga Sethene telling the court there was “no iota of evidence” supporting the allegations.
But Dlamini-Zuma’s lawyers have fired back, placing an affidavit from ANC delegate Mandla Themba Sibiya before the court.
Sibiya claims he witnessed Mbalula distributing money to delegates at Nasrec and says he personally benefited from the alleged payments. Dlamini-Zuma’s legal team argues that his evidence creates a genuine dispute of fact that cannot properly be resolved without oral evidence and cross-examination.
Dlamini-Zuma has previously argued that money has played a role in ANC leadership contests, while Mbalula has rejected the allegations and insisted they cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.
The political significance of the case extends beyond the courtroom.
The dispute pits the ANC’s secretary-general against a veteran NEC member who has previously contested for the party’s presidency, exposing deep disagreements over the conduct of internal leadership contests.
For now, however, neither side has secured a judicial finding on the truth of the vote-buying allegations.
The court has reserved judgment.
The ruling could determine whether the matter ends with Mbalula’s urgent application or whether the explosive claims proceed to a full trial, where witnesses could be called and cross-examined.
