Ernst Roets faces backlash for plans to report South Africans to their employers over negative Charlie Kirk posts
Debate arises as Roets plans to report social media incitement to employers.
Image: Picture: Itumeleng English/African News Agency (ANA)
Think tank Lex Libertas (formerly Pioneer Initiative) executive director Ernst Roets has come under fire for creating a 'study' to track and report social media users to their employers for inciting violence in South Africa following the assassination of US right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
According to Roets, a preliminary investigation shows that the past week has seen a sharp rise in the glorification of murder, death threats, and incitement of violence across the country.
"There should be consequences for the celebration and incitement of violence. Whether disciplinary action is taken is up to employers to decide. Yet appropriate action can only be taken if employers have access to the relevant information,” he said.
Roets added that the project aligns with Lex Libertas' long-term mission. "Lex Libertas seeks to promote a viable political dispensation for the peoples of South Africa through the decentralisation of the political system and the promotion of self-governance."
But the move has also triggered strong backlash. Former Member of the National Assembly, Phumzile van Damme, criticised Roets directly, saying: "Who died and made this grifter the mourning police of South Africa? We cannot have this sort of nonsense become a thing."
She added that freedom of speech remains robust in the country despite Roets' initiative.
"A se mo States mo (We are not in the states. We have proper free speech here in South Africa, you can pretty much say what you feel and no right-wing grifter will stop you. As long as it isn't hate speech, no one can bully you with silly legal threats. Poppycock," Van Damme added.
Legal expert Bonga Dlulisa noted that South Africa's constitutional framework strikes a balance between freedom of expression and protecting other rights.
"Section 16 of the Constitution of South Africa protects freedom of expression, including political expression," Dlulisa said. "However, constitutional rights are not absolute, they can be limited if they infringe on the rights of others (dignity, equality, safety)."
Dlulisa further explained the workplace implications. "South African case law recognises that employees' conduct on social media may have workplace consequences if it affects the employer's reputation, the employment relationship, or the rights of other employees," he said.
He added that incitement, even if unintentional, could warrant disciplinary action. "What's on social media is already public, and I don't see how a public post made by an individual on a public platform should violate the Protection of Personal Information Act (POPI)," Dlulisa said.
Activist Bianca van Wyk also opposed the initiative, questioning its intent.
"Is Roets openly threatening to violate people's right to privacy in South Africa and their employment because they don't properly mourn the death of a conservative commentator in the US that spread falsehoods on South Africa including that there was a 'mini white genocide' in South Africa?" She asked.
Author Gareth van Onselen was equally scathing, describing Roets as inconsistent in his approach to free expression.
"The thing you need to understand about Roets, is he is fundamentally a hypocrite," Van Onselen said. "Free Speech is not a principle but a pragmatic weapon to be manipulated. He is happy to 'dox' or threaten when it suits him. Celebrating death is disgusting, but I'm afraid that is all it is."