Johannesburg — THE relevance of Julius Malema's intention when he made comments about President Jacob Zuma 's rape accuser was debated at the Equality Court in Johannesburg yesterday.

In the run-up to April's election, the African National Congress Youth League president told students at Peninsula Technikon: "When a woman didn't enjoy it, she leaves early in the morning. Those who had (a) nice time will wait until the sun comes out, request breakfast and taxi money. You can't ask for money from somebody who raped you."

Zuma was acquitted of rape in 2006.

The Sonke Gender Justice Network approached the Equality Court in Johannesburg, saying Malema's comments were hate speech and harassment because they perpetuated "rape myths" including that there was a "stereotypical rape victim who is expected to behave in a particular fashion".

Yesterday, Malema's lawyer, Tumi Mokwena, argued that he had simply recounted the judgment in Zuma's trial, and had no hurtful intentions.

Mokwena said it was the judge, not Malema, who said Zuma's rape accuser did not behave like someone who had been raped -- because she had not left Zuma's house immediately and had taken food from the fridge in the morning. "But when (Malema) says that, there is a huge outcry." Mokwena said for Malema to have committed hate speech and harassment, the Equality Act required him to have directly intended to cause harm.

But Sonke's attorney Chris Todd argued Malema's subjective intentions were irrelevant to the Equality Act. All that was required was that a reasonable person could have concluded Malema intended to cause harm, Todd said.

Judgment was reserved.