Zuma-Sambudla’s social media activity became a focal point for the prosecution. One of the posts she shared showed a vehicle transporter being set alight at Mooi Plaza in KwaZulu-Natal, accompanied by the hashtag #FreeJacobZuma.
She also posted a statement that read, “Mooi Plaza…we see you!!! Amandla,” along with several raised fist emojis. Additionally, she shared posters calling for a shutdown of KwaZulu-Natal and used the term “azishe,” which means “let it burn” in Zulu.
The Jacob Zuma Foundation has defended these posts, arguing that expressions like “Amandla” (meaning power) and “azishe” are rooted in South Africa’s liberation struggle and cannot be construed as incitements to terrorism. The foundation stated that criminalizing such language is an attempt to erase the history of resistance in South Africa.
“The words ‘amandla’ and ‘azishe’ are not acts of terrorism. They are expressions of resistance that are deeply embedded in the history of South Africa’s fight for freedom,” the foundation said in a statement. “To criminalize these expressions is to deny the lived heritage of the liberation struggle.”
The National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) argues that the charges against Zuma-Sambudla are serious and have pursued the case with determination. Mthunzi Mhaga, a spokesperson for the NPA, stated that the case is complex due to the need for expert analysis of social media content.
The police, he explained, did not have the requisite expertise to handle social media-related cases, which is why external specialists were brought in to examine the evidence.
Despite the controversy, the NPA insists that the charges are based on solid evidence and that the case would not have been pursued if they were not confident in their ability to secure a conviction. Zuma-Sambudla was formally charged in January 2025, nearly four years after the riots.
The Zuma family has long been at the center of political and legal battles. Jacob Zuma himself has faced multiple court appearances on corruption charges, although he has consistently denied all allegations. His son, Duduzane Zuma, was also involved in legal proceedings, including a 2019 case in which he was acquitted of culpable homicide charges related to a fatal car accident.
The Zuma family’s legal troubles have been the subject of intense public debate, with many of Jacob Zuma’s supporters viewing the ongoing prosecutions as part of a broader political agenda aimed at discrediting his legacy.
The Jacob Zuma Foundation contends that Zuma-Sambudla’s case is simply the latest example of this political vendetta, framing her social media posts as nothing more than expressions of solidarity with her father during a time of crisis.
As the trial progresses, it is expected that Zuma-Sambudla’s supporters will continue to rally behind her. The case has already sparked significant debate on social media and within South African politics, with many questioning whether the charges are a legitimate response to the violence of the 2021 unrest or an attempt to silence those who oppose the current political establishment.
For now, all eyes will be on the Durban High Court as the legal proceedings unfold. Zuma-Sambudla’s defense will likely argue that the state’s case is politically charged and that her posts were simply a reaction to the tragic events following her father’s arrest.
On the other hand, the prosecution will seek to prove that her words played a role in encouraging the violence that resulted in the deaths of hundreds and extensive destruction.
As Zuma-Sambudla prepares for her day in court, the case is about more than just the charges against her. It has become a focal point in South Africa’s ongoing political struggles, raising questions about freedom of speech, the legacy of the apartheid-era resistance, and the use of social media in modern protests.
The outcome of the trial may have lasting implications not just for Zuma-Sambudla but for the broader political landscape in South Africa.
