FLIPPING THE BIRD: Ntshavheni says SA diplomat will face action for ‘hobnobbing’ with Zuma and Ajay Gupta

Former South African President Jacob Zuma recently visited India, where he was joined by Anil Sooklal, the South African High Commissioner to India, and Ajay Gupta, a businessman implicated in allegations of state capture during Zuma’s tenure. This gathering took place at a prayer meeting held at the Sidipeeth Shri Dakshin Kali Temple in Haridwar on 26 June. Photographs from the event showed Zuma, Sooklal, and Gupta standing together beside Swami Kailashanand Giri, a prominent spiritual leader in India.

The incident sparked significant controversy within South Africa’s political landscape. Minister in the Presidency, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, expressed strong disapproval of Sooklal’s attendance at the event. She described the situation as a "level of disgrace" and criticized Sooklal for associating with individuals accused of criminal activities rather than focusing on his duties to uphold the rule of law. Ntshavheni emphasized that Sooklal’s actions could undermine the integrity of South Africa’s legal system and questioned how he could represent the nation while engaging with figures linked to corruption.

In response to these concerns, Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ronald Lamola, announced that an internal investigation into Sooklal’s involvement would be conducted. During a post-Cabinet press conference on 3 July, Ntshavheni reiterated that appropriate measures would be taken against Sooklal to ensure compliance with national laws and prevent any further undermining of the country’s judicial processes.

Ajay Gupta, along with his brothers Atul and Rajesh, faces accusations of orchestrating extensive government corruption and colluding with Zuma during his presidency. Despite these allegations, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) has stated that there is currently no arrest warrant outstanding for Ajay Gupta. The Guptas left South Africa in 2018, and previous attempts to extradite them from the United Arab Emirates were unsuccessful due to procedural issues raised in a Dubai court.

Ntshavheni also criticized Zuma for continuing to engage with individuals associated with alleged criminal behavior, suggesting that such associations reflect poorly on his character and intentions regarding leadership in South Africa. She noted that Zuma’s actions demonstrate a disregard for the laws of the country and raise questions about his suitability for future political roles.

A defense for Sooklal came from an unnamed source, who claimed that his participation in the event was based on directives from the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco). According to this account, Sooklal was following standard protocol by extending customary courtesies to Zuma as a former head of state. Additionally, the High Commission had coordinated with the Indian government to facilitate Zuma’s visit and had met him upon his arrival in New Delhi.

Zuma was accompanied by Mzwanele Manyi, a close associate, during his trip to India. While Ntshavheni acknowledged that former heads of state may receive certain privileges, she stressed that the government reserves the right to reassess these privileges if they are misused to challenge the legal framework of the republic. She highlighted that this was not the first occasion where Zuma had been perceived as undermining both the foreign policy and legal standards of South Africa.

As the situation unfolds, the focus remains on whether Sooklal will face disciplinary action and what implications this might have for diplomatic relations between South Africa and India. The incident underscores broader discussions around accountability, governance, and the responsibilities of public officials in upholding the rule of law.