It was a tragic tale. The death of a young child from eating rotten polony. And it was one the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) sent viral, with threats on social media of holding “the sinners” responsible.
But the tale was not true.
Sadly, a child died. But not from eating polony. And the man who went public with the story was not even her father, as he claimed.
Now the EFF has been interdicted from repeating the story. And it has been ordered to pay punitive costs in a defamation case brought by Gen4foods, which sells its Thompsons Meat-branded products at Shoprite.
The man who started it all was Anthony Hadebe. He claimed he had bought a branded 2kg family value pack of chicken polony from Shoprite in August 2023. He claimed his nine children, his wife and brother ate it and became ill. One of his children — who over time he referred to as both a boy and a girl — died, he claimed.
The EFF took up his cause and began publishing allegations on Facebook and X, calling essentially for a boycott of Thompsons’ products and for justice for the child.
In November 2023, Gen4Foods obtained an interim interdict against both Hadebe and the EFF, to put a stop to what it said were defamatory and inflammatory posts.
On the return date in December, Hadebe did not appear and was not represented. In light of this, the interdict was confirmed against him.
The case against the EFF then came before Durban high court judge Rob Mossop, with the company seeking the confirmation of the interdict against the political party.
Looking at the history of the matter, Mossop said it was relatively certain, from a till slip, Hadebe had bought the polony as he claimed to have done. A few days later, he went to the Shoprite store and lodged a complaint about the quality of the polony.
About two weeks later he met two representatives of Gen4foods who, as a sign of empathy, gave him a complimentary pack of Thompsons products. However, Hadebe later sent an e-mail claiming that polony was also “rotten”.
In his social media posts, Hadebe claimed his “son” had died and called for supporters to help him get justice. A later post indicated his “son” had been referred to a clinic, indicating the child was alive. Then he posted his “daughter” had passed on from eating the rotten polony. Again in a later post he made reference to his son.
Hadebe was interviewed by the EFF, and a video was posted on X by the political party. In it, Hadebe said he had lost his job, his life was a mess and the polony had worms in it. He claimed Shoprite stores in black communities did not have the “right” products, and suggested “best before dates” were being changed.
The EFF made several posts about the alleged incident on social media, and Hadebe was also interviewed by a local television station and newspaper.
Mossop said his version attracted sympathetic support from members of the public who took to social media urging people to “apply pressure”.
It is to the shame of the [EFF] it considered it acceptable to seize upon the death of a young child and assimilate it into its election campaign and make capital out of it. The statements it made were unequivocally untrue
— Judge Rob Mossop
“This was understandable,” he said. “The story advanced was undoubtedly tragic and heartbreaking. But was it true? A terrible story undoubtedly, but an unverified story.”
Gen4foods did its own investigations. This included testing at two laboratories of a sample of the “rotten polony” as provided by Hadebe. The tests came back clear.
Then it emerged while a child had died, it was not Hadebe’s biological daughter, and she had not died from eating contaminated meat. The child referred to as M died of natural causes when she was 15 months old. Her mother was involved in a relationship with Hadebe.
Her biological father, a Mr S, confirmed M had not been well for about three months before she died.
Mossop said Mr S became aware of the allegations being made by Hadebe and the EFF and the latter was “using her death as a campaign tool”.
Mr S’s sister sent an e-mail in the name of her brother to Gen4foods telling them it was being “scammed”. Mr S then met company representatives and told them his version, which he then detailed in an affidavit.
When that affidavit was sent to the lawyers representing Hadebe and the EFF, their attorneys withdrew. But the EFF insisted on opposing the finalisation of the interdict and remained, in the words of Mossop, “entirely unrepentant”. The party, he said, continued to claim it reasonably believed what it was told by Hadebe. But why it did was not addressed at all.
“Even the most cursory examination of [Hadebe’s] version would have revealed inexplicable contradictions which would have required extreme caution to be exercised.”
Mossop said the EFF had also claimed the issue was “moot”. But, he said, this was not so when there was no concession its conduct was unlawful.
“It is to the shame of the [EFF] it considered it acceptable to seize upon the death of a young child and assimilate it into its election campaign and make capital out of it. The statements it made were unequivocally untrue.”
He said claims by the EFF that the company was attempting to “muzzle it” also held no water because the interdict was “specific, nuanced and limited” to statements regarding M having died after consuming the polony.
“There was no attempt by the [EFF] to act with any temperance, and there was no attempt to ascertain the truth of what it was posting. The potential for harm was maximised. It still maintains that it was justified.
“In its first message, it stated the company and Shoprite would ‘pay for their sins’. In another post it said those responsible would be ‘held accountable for their actions’.
“The sinner was, in fact, neither Gen4foods or Shoprite, but the EFF. It will accordingly understand it must now be held accountable for its actions,” Mossop said, directing that it pay costs on a punitive scale.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.