South Africa’s Equality Court has found a respondent guilty of hate speech, unfair discrimination and harassment targeting the LGBTQIA+ community….reports Africa Daily News Desk
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has welcomed a landmark Equality Court judgment finding a respondent guilty of hate speech, unfair discrimination and harassment over conduct targeting members of the LGBTQIA+ community. The court ordered the respondent to issue a public apology, pay R200,000 in damages to a non-governmental organisation promoting equality and be referred to the National Prosecuting Authority for a criminal investigation.
In a media statement issued on Monday, 12 October 2026, the commission said the judgment was delivered by the Equality Court in Gqeberha in the case of South African Human Rights Commission and Another v Dawood Lagardien(Case No. 2391/2023).
The matter arose from a complaint concerning a sign displayed outside a business in Gqeberha that excluded members of the LGBTQIA+ community. It also involved the establishment and administration of a WhatsApp group containing harmful and threatening messages directed at the community.
The SAHRC initiated proceedings under the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000, commonly known as the Equality Act. The Commission for Gender Equality subsequently joined the proceedings as a second applicant, while Media Monitoring Africa Trust, now known as Moxii Africa, participated as amicus curiae, or a friend of the court.
The court found that the respondent’s conduct constituted hate speech, unfair discrimination and harassment in violation of the Equality Act. Alongside declaratory relief, the court interdicted the respondent from engaging in further unlawful conduct.
The respondent was also directed to issue a public apology and pay R200,000 in damages to a non-governmental organisation promoting equality, to be identified by the SAHRC. The matter was further referred to the National Prosecuting Authority for criminal investigation.
Court highlights rights and digital accountability
The SAHRC said the judgment was significant for several reasons, including its reaffirmation that constitutional rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression do not justify conduct that unlawfully infringes the dignity and equality of others.
The commission also welcomed the court’s recognition that hate speech and discriminatory conduct can occur both in physical spaces and through digital platforms.
By considering the respondent’s business premises and the administration of a WhatsApp group, the court demonstrated how existing human rights protections apply to harmful conduct facilitated through online communications.
The judgment also addressed the question of accountability after the immediate offending conduct had ceased.
The court rejected the argument that the matter had become moot simply because the offending sign had been removed and the WhatsApp group discontinued. The commission said this reinforced the importance of accountability and effective remedies, even when the immediate conduct has ended.
The SAHRC particularly welcomed the court’s recognition of the harm caused by conduct targeting historically marginalised communities.
It said the protection of equality and dignity remained a constitutional imperative, regardless of an individual’s sexual orientation or gender identity.
The commission reaffirmed its commitment to challenging unfair discrimination, harassment and hate speech, and to promoting a society founded on human dignity, equality and freedom for all.
