Key Takeaways
- Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni condemned South African High Commissioner to India Anil Sooklal for appearing alongside former president Jacob Zuma and fugitive Gupta brother Ajay Gupta, calling the act a “disgrace” and a “middle finger” to South Africans.
- The Gupta brothers remain wanted for alleged state‑capture‑related fraud and money‑laundering; despite an cancelled arrest warrant in 2019, they are still fugitives, with the UAE rejecting an extradition request in February 2023.
- Ntshavheni said International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola has requested a report on Sooklal’s conduct and warned that “drastic steps” could follow if the ambassador’s actions are deemed inappropriate.
- The briefing also highlighted broader concerns about former presidents undermining South African foreign policy, citing Zuma’s unilateral meeting with Morocco’s foreign minister, and announced a review of the policy governing state‑funded trips for ex‑presidents.
Overview of the Press Briefing
Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni held a press briefing on Friday to outline the government’s stance on several topical issues. The session followed the regular Cabinet meeting and allowed journalists to query the minister on recent diplomatic controversies. Ntshavheni’s remarks focused primarily on the conduct of South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, whose recent public appearance alongside former president Jacob Zuma and the fugitive Gupta family drew sharp criticism. The briefing served as a platform for the minister to reiterate the administration’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and to distance the state from any perception of complicity with individuals accused of corruption.
Details of Sooklal’s Visit with Zuma and the Gupta Brothers
According to the minister, Sooklal was photographed and filmed alongside Jacob Zuma and Mzwanele Manyi, Zuma’s close confidante, after a visit to Ajay Gupta in India. The encounter took place following a trip by Zuma to meet the Gupta brothers, who have been living abroad as fugitives since 2018. Ntshavheni described the scene as “eyebrow‑raising” and said it sent a troubling message about the loyalties of South African officials. The minister emphasized that Sooklal, as a representative of the South African government, should have been working to facilitate the return of the Gupta brothers to face justice rather than associating with them publicly.
Context of the Gupta Fugitive Status and State‑Capture Allegations
Ajay Gupta, along with his brothers Atul and Rajesh, is accused of being the architects of a vast state‑capture scheme during Jacob Zuma’s presidency. Allegations include the siphoning of billions of rand from state coffers through kickbacks, undue influence over government contracts, and the manipulation of procurement processes. Although an arrest warrant for Ajay Gupta was issued in 2018, it was reportedly cancelled in 2019; nevertheless, South African authorities have since declared him a fugitive and continue to seek his extradition. The Gupta network’s alleged role in state capture has been a focal point of multiple judicial inquiries, including the Zondo Commission, which highlighted the extent of alleged corruption and its impact on public trust.
Extradition Efforts and the UAE’s Decision
South Africa has pursued mutual legal assistance to bring the Gupta brothers back to stand trial for fraud and money‑laundering, particularly concerning the Nulane scam. In February 2023, the United Arab Emirates rejected a formal extradition request for the Gupta brothers, stating that the supplied documentation did not meet its legal requirements. Despite this setback, South African officials maintain that the brothers remain wanted and that diplomatic channels will continue to be used to secure their return. The minister noted that the government’s pursuit of accountability is ongoing and that any appearance of officials fraternising with fugitives undermines these efforts.
Characterisation of Sooklal’s Conduct as a “Disgrace” and “Middle Finger”
Ntshavheni did not mince words when describing Sooklal’s behaviour, labelling it a “disgrace” and saying it amounted to showing South Africans the “middle finger.” She argued that the ambassador, whose salary is paid by taxpayers, was failing to perform his diplomatic duties by instead hobnobbing with individuals accused of massive corruption. The minister stressed that such conduct not only embarrasses the nation but also erodes public confidence in South Africa’s foreign service and its commitment to justice. She called for a clear message that officials must uphold the integrity of their positions, especially when dealing with persons subject to international legal processes.
Government Response: Request for Report and Potential Drastic Steps
In reaction to the incident, International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola has reportedly requested a detailed report from the officials involved in Sooklal’s visit. Ntshavheni indicated that the government is reviewing the matter carefully and warned that “drastic steps” could be taken if the ambassador’s actions are found to violate diplomatic protocols or national interests. While she did not specify what those steps might entail, the warning signals a zero‑tolerance approach to behaviour that appears to condone or legitimize fugitive status. The minister’s remarks underscore the administration’s resolve to enforce accountability within its diplomatic corps.
Broader Concerns: Former Presidents Undermining Foreign Policy
Beyond the Sooklal episode, Ntshavheni highlighted a pattern in which former presidents have acted in ways that conflict with South Africa’s official foreign policy. She referenced an incident from August of the previous year, when Jacob Zuma held a bilateral meeting with Morocco’s foreign minister, Nasser Bourita, without the Presidency’s knowledge or approval. Ntshavheni noted that the Presidency does not maintain diaries of former presidents, even though the state funds their trips, which creates a gap in oversight. This lack of tracking, she argued, enables former leaders to pursue personal agendas that may contradict national diplomatic objectives.
Review of Funding for Ex‑Presidents’ Trips
Responding to concerns about unmonitored travel by former heads of state, Ntshavheni announced that the government is reviewing the policy governing state‑funded trips for ex‑presidents. The review aims to establish clearer guidelines, improve transparency, and ensure that any official travel aligns with South Africa’s foreign‑policy objectives and legal obligations. By potentially instituting mandatory reporting or approval mechanisms, the administration hopes to prevent future instances where former presidents engage in meetings that could be perceived as undermining the country’s stance on issues such as corruption, human rights, or international sanctions.
Implications and Concluding Thoughts
The press briefing delivered by Minister Khumbudzo Ntshavheni encapsulates a moment of heightened scrutiny over South Africa’s diplomatic conduct and the lingering repercussions of the state‑capture era. The condemnation of Ambassador Sooklal’s appearance with Jacob Zuma and the Gupta family signals the government’s intent to distance itself from any perception of endorsement of fugitive corruption suspects. Simultaneously, the broader discussion about former presidents’ independent foreign‑policy engagements and the funding of their travels reveals a systemic challenge: ensuring that all state representatives, past and present, act in accordance with national interests and the rule of law. As the government moves forward with investigations, policy reviews, and possible disciplinary measures, the episode serves as a reminder that accountability must extend beyond the judiciary to encompass the entire apparatus of state, including its diplomatic service and the privileges afforded to former leaders. The outcome of these processes will likely influence public trust in South Africa’s institutions and its ability to project a coherent, credible stance on the international stage.