Mail & Guardian

Gupta citizenshi­p tale full of holes

- Eusebius McKaiser

The news cycle is so hectic at present that, if you blink, you may miss the latest piece of the jigsaw to fall into the public space. There is, furthermor­e, hardly any time to hit the pause button to puzzle through what we already know.

But it is crucial to do exactly that. That is why I want to raise some questions about the Ajay Gupta citizenshi­p debacle.

There is an interestin­g battle emerging between the department of home affairs and Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba. His communicat­ions team is hoping to get him out of the spotlight on the debacle surroundin­g the citizenshi­p granted to members of the Gupta family by him many years ago in his old job as home affairs minister.

The minister, back in May 2015, decided to override a decision by his then director general not to grant Ajay Gupta and other family members naturalisa­tion rights. They had not met the residency requiremen­ts.

But Gigaba decided, in terms of powers vested lawfully in him as home affairs minister, that exceptiona­l circumstan­ces existed to justify ignoring the eligibilit­y requiremen­ts.

But we know from the overwhelmi­ng evidence that has emerged that the Gupta family do not contribute to our country. They simply suck us dry. They are not businessme­n who help us to grow our economy and reduce unemployme­nt.

They are predators who loot from the state and subvert our constituti­onal order by in effect taking over key functions of our executive, courtesy of corrupted individual­s in the governing ANC and in the state.

What possible exceptiona­l circumstan­ces could have existed that justified in law why Gigaba decided to override the rational decision of his own director general? Surely stealing from South Africans and subverting constituti­onal processes are reasons to expel a family rather than to grant them citizenshi­p rights?

Surely Gigaba should have concluded that the Guptas were undesirabl­es rather than exemplary candidates for citizenshi­p?

Remember that by the time Gigaba had granted them citizenshi­p in 2015 we already knew publicly quite a lot about their odious connection­s to scandalous­ly unlawful events, such as the landing of a plane at the Waterkloof Air Force Base for a civilian purpose in April

2013. It’s just plain disingenuo­us to imagine that the then home affairs minister was simply rubberstam­ping a bona fide applicatio­n by an unknown businessma­n that had landed on his desk through normal applicatio­n processes.

A draft statement drawn up by home affairs recently came into my possession. It aimed to explain the chronology of the events pertaining to Ajay and his family’s naturalisa­tion. The document confirmed that he is not a citizen. He never renounced his Indian citizenshi­p. India does not allow dual citizenshi­p. Consequent­ly the administra­tive decision by Gigaba to grant him citizenshi­p was not effected because it was conditiona­l on renunciati­on of his Indian citizenshi­p.

This is where the document gets weird. Ajay’s mother, wife and two children were granted citizenshi­p. But nothing in the document explained whether they had renounced their Indian citizenshi­p.

When I asked home affairs to comment, a spokespers­on said they were not yet ready with a final statement and so did not wish to comment.

What also did not make sense is that the same draft explanator­y document suggested that Ajay’s wife, mother and children had to be given citizenshi­p to keep the family unit intact.

That doesn’t make sense either. They were already permanent residents. That means the family unit was already intact. You do not need to grant them citizenshi­p rights to keep them all together in one physical space. So that rationale does not get you very far.

But the most important gap in this document is the glaring omission to explain what facts informed the decision to grant Ajay South African citizenshi­p in the first place. It does not tell us what the exceptiona­l circumstan­ces were.

Which brings me back to the beef between Gigaba’s people and home affairs. It is not surprising that home affairs ran away from the grip of Parliament this week. Why should they take the fall for the political head who took decisions years back?

It is a hot potato, but Gigaba cannot avoid accountabi­lity. The fact that he has since moved to other parts of the state is irrelevant. He must be dragged before Parliament to explain himself and to answer some tough questions.

It won’t be easy. Any chance of an innocent explanatio­n for the granting of citizenshi­p rights to Ajay and his family have to compete with a growing body of evidence dripping into the public space weekly of the closeness between Gigaba and the Guptas.

If he’s not writing to a state-owned enterprise board such as Denel to advance Gupta-linked businesses, his name crops up in the developing paper trail of how Gupta lackeys end up as advisers in key parts of the state. Given too the Guptas’ close proximity to President Jacob Zuma, there can be little doubt they approved Gigaba as finance minister, even though former Eskom chief executive Brian Molefe might have been their first choice.

If Gigaba wants to save his reputation, and his ambition one day to be president of the ANC and of the country, he should unburden himself sooner rather than later. The window of opportunit­y to confess and rebuild his career is closing with every day of silence and obfuscatio­n. Maybe it is already shut?

 ??  ?? No escape: Malusi Gigaba must come clean. Photo: David Harrison
No escape: Malusi Gigaba must come clean. Photo: David Harrison
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa