High Commissioner Anil Sooklal cleared by DIRCO, returns to India - Sources
South Africa's High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, has returned to his post after being cleared by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) regarding his involvement in former President Jacob Zuma's controversial visit to India in June. The visit raised concerns due to Zuma's attendance at an event where controversial businessman Anil Gupta was also present. DIRCO investigated the situation and confirmed that Sooklal had been informed of Zuma's trip by the Directorate of State Visits on June 19. Sooklal met Zuma at the protocol lounge in Mumbai on June 25, as per standard diplomatic procedures. He attended a religious ceremony in Haridwar as an invited guest, separately from Zuma's delegation, and later joined Zuma for a photo op. However, Sooklal did not interact with Gupta and was not part of the media interview conducted by Zuma. DIRCO authorized the visit and activated official protocols, including airport lounges and notifications to foreign missions.
South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, has returned to his post following a review by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO). The review came in response to concerns raised over his presence at a religious event in Haridwar, India, during a private visit by former President Jacob Zuma in June 2026. During the visit, Zuma was accompanied by several aides, including five members of the South African Police Service, and the trip was funded by the Presidency. DIRCO was fully aware of the visit and had activated standard protocol procedures, including the use of protocol lounges at King Shaka and OR Tambo airports, and notification of diplomatic missions in Dubai and New Delhi. The visit included a private dinner in Vasant Kunj and a visit to a temple in Haridwar. After Zuma’s return, controversy arose due to the presence of controversial businessman Anil Gupta at the event. Social media posts featuring photographs of Sooklal alongside Zuma and Gupta sparked public concern over whether Sooklal’s participation had been authorized. In response, DIRCO issued a public statement requesting clarification from Sooklal regarding his involvement. According to sources, Sooklal was informed of Zuma’s visit by DIRCO’s Directorate of State Visits on June 19, 2026. The South African High Commission in New Delhi requested Zuma’s itinerary, which was followed by flight details. On June 25, Sooklal received Zuma at the protocol lounge in Mumbai in accordance with diplomatic protocol. During their meeting, Zuma explained that he was visiting India as a guest of Hindu spiritual leader Mahamandaleshwar Kailashananda Swami, whom he had known since his presidency. Zuma was scheduled to participate in a pooja at the Swami’s ashram on the banks of the Ganges River on June 26. Sooklal had already been invited to attend the prayer ceremony and was not participating as part of Zuma’s delegation or as his guest. He traveled to the event with his wife. At the event, Zuma and Sooklal were both announced as chief guests, along with Gupta. After the program, Sooklal was invited to join Zuma for a photograph. Sources stated that Sooklal had no interaction with Gupta and was not involved in the media interview conducted by Zuma. The circumstances surrounding the photograph led to increased scrutiny, particularly after the image was widely shared online. Questions emerged about Sooklal’s association with Gupta and whether his presence at the event had been sanctioned. Despite multiple inquiries from IOL News, DIRCO did not respond directly. However, sources indicated that Sooklal was cleared and has resumed his duties in India. It has been established that Sooklal met with senior DIRCO officials at the recent SADC Summit in Durban. DIRCO confirmed that it had completed internal consultations with Sooklal regarding the situation involving Zuma’s private visit to India from June 25 to 27, 2026. They were informed of the visit on June 19 and requested assistance with protocol and logistical arrangements. In accordance with established practices for former presidents, DIRCO notified the South African High Commission in New Delhi and requested customary protocol support. Information from the High Commission indicated that no substantive engagement between Zuma and Gupta occurred during the visit. The assistance provided was part of routine protocol, administrative, and logistical support typically offered to former heads of state through official channels, including ceremonial lounge arrangements, airport courtesies, liaison with host government authorities, and travel facilitation. DIRCO emphasized that Sooklal attended the prayer event in Haridwar in his capacity as head of mission, following a separate invitation from the host organizers. Gupta was among approximately 1,000 invited guests, though Sooklal reported no direct interaction with him. The department concluded that the mission’s role was limited to ceremonial reception and departure arrangements, as well as attendance at a public religious event for which Sooklal had been independently invited in his official capacity. DIRCO reiterated that routine assistance to former heads of state does not imply authorization for them to represent the government or advance official interests. The department remains committed to constitutional principles, the rule of law, and accountability. While Gupta is not subject to an extradition request by South Africa, DIRCO continues to facilitate cooperation between South African and Indian law enforcement authorities regarding mutual legal assistance requests and ongoing legal processes involving members of the Gupta family. A new mechanism is being proposed to assess such engagements for potential reputational, political, diplomatic, or security risks.
The South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) has concluded that its high commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, did not engage in wrongdoing after attending a religious event in Haridwar alongside former President Jacob Zuma and businessman Ajay Gupta. Indian media shared photos of the trio at the event, causing diplomatic discomfort. Dirco clarified that Sooklal's participation was purely ceremonial and that the mission did not organize or facilitate any private meetings between Zuma and Gupta. The department emphasized that routine protocol support for former presidents does not imply endorsement of their personal interactions. The incident followed Zuma's visit to India, where Sooklal provided standard logistical assistance in line with established procedures.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual account of Dirco's findings regarding Sooklal's actions, emphasizing procedural compliance rather than assigning blame. It avoids taking sides on the broader implications of Zuma's associations, maintaining neutrality in its framing.
Why factuality (95): The Daily Maverick article accurately reflects DIRCO's official stance, quoting their statement directly. It clearly states that the mission did not facilitate any private meetings and presents the facts without embellishment, aligning well with the cross-source consensus.
Why objectivity (85): The article maintains a balanced tone, focusing on the official response and avoiding emotionally charged language. It presents both the embarrassment and the official clarification without taking sides.
DIRCO has confirmed that South Africa's High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, was cleared following former President Jacob Zuma's private visit to India in June 2026. Concerns arose after images surfaced showing Sooklal at an event where controversial businessman Anil Gupta was also present, prompting questions about potential involvement. In a statement, DIRCO clarified that Sooklal's role was limited to ceremonial duties and logistical support as per established protocols for former presidents. They stated that there was no evidence of Sooklal facilitating any meetings between Zuma and Gupta, and that he attended a public religious event in Haridwar separately at the invitation of organizers. The department emphasized that routine diplomatic support does not imply endorsement of personal interactions.
Bias read (Center): The article presents DIRCO's official statement regarding the clearance of High Commissioner Anil Sooklal, focusing on procedural clarification rather than taking a partisan stance. While the context involves high-profile figures like Jacob Zuma and Anil Gupta, the reporting emphasizes institutional
Why factuality (90): This article directly quotes DIRCO's statement confirming Sooklal's clearance and clarifies that no substantive engagement between Zuma and Gupta occurred. It aligns closely with the cross-source consensus and presents the facts as per official statements.
Why objectivity (80): The article maintains a neutral tone, presenting DIRCO's statement without overt bias. However, it slightly emphasizes the 'controversy' aspect, which could be seen as a minor editorial tilt.
South Africa's High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, has returned to his post after being cleared by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) regarding his involvement in former President Jacob Zuma's controversial visit to India in June. The visit raised concerns due to Zuma's attendance at an event where controversial businessman Anil Gupta was also present. DIRCO investigated the situation and confirmed that Sooklal had been informed of Zuma's trip by the Directorate of State Visits on June 19. Sooklal met Zuma at the protocol lounge in Mumbai on June 25 and attended a prayer ceremony separately from Zuma's delegation. He was later photographed with Zuma and Gupta, leading to speculation about his association with Gupta. However, sources indicate that Sooklal was not part of Zuma's delegation and had no direct interaction with Gupta.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the situation, providing details from multiple sources without overtly favoring any side. It includes information about the controversy, the investigation by DIRCO, and clarifications regarding Sooklal's role and interactions. There is no evident bias in ph
Why factuality (85): The article provides detailed information about the Zuma visit, DIRCO's involvement, and Sooklal's clearance based on multiple sources. It aligns with the cross-source consensus regarding the nature of the visit and the lack of direct facilitation of Gupta meetings. However, some details like the ex
Why objectivity (75): The tone is somewhat sensationalist, particularly around the 'furore' over Gupta's presence. While factual, it frames the situation as a controversy, potentially influencing reader perception beyond mere reporting.
South Africa's High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, has returned to his post after being cleared by the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) regarding his involvement in former President Jacob Zuma's controversial visit to India in June. The visit raised concerns due to Zuma's attendance at an event where controversial businessman Anil Gupta was also present. DIRCO investigated the situation and confirmed that Sooklal had been informed of Zuma's trip by the Directorate of State Visits on June 19. Sooklal met Zuma at the protocol lounge in Mumbai on June 25, as per standard diplomatic procedures. He attended a religious ceremony in Haridwar as an invited guest, separately from Zuma's delegation, and later joined Zuma for a photo op. However, Sooklal did not interact with Gupta and was not part of the media interview conducted by Zuma. DIRCO authorized the visit and activated official protocols, including airport lounges and notifications to foreign missions.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced account of the situation, citing multiple sources and providing context about the actions taken by DIRCO and Sooklal. It does not exhibit overtly biased language or selective sourcing, offering a neutral overview of the events and their implications.
Why factuality (85): Similar to Article 0, this piece reports on Sooklal's return to duty and DIRCO's clearance, citing sources. It matches the cross-source consensus but includes some repetitive elements and incomplete sentences, affecting overall clarity.
Why objectivity (75): The language used ('considerable embarrassment') suggests a degree of judgment about the situation, which leans towards a more critical perspective than purely objective reporting.
How each side covered it
The same event, grouped by the political lean of the outlets covering it.
progressive
center
conservative
★
How each side covered it
Support independent, bias-aware news and unlock the social pulse, community voting, and every other Supporter feature.
ZA
