Zuma’s India Trip With Gupta Raises Questions Over Diplomatic Support
Former president Jacob Zuma’s visit to India has come under renewed scrutiny after he was photographed with wanted fugitive Ajay Gupta, raising questions about the role played by South Africa’s High Commissioner to India, Anil Sooklal, during the trip.
The meeting, which took place at a temple in India, has prompted criticism over the diplomatic support extended to Zuma, with International Relations and Cooperation Minister Ronald Lamola expressing concern that the former president appeared to be pursuing a “parallel foreign policy” outside the authority of the current government.
However, international relations expert Dr Kingsley Makhubela believes Sooklal may not have breached any rules. He said the High Commissioner is obliged to provide official support to former heads of state travelling abroad, as Zuma continues to enjoy the privileges attached to his former office, including the use of a diplomatic passport.
Makhubela explained that South African diplomatic missions are generally expected to provide protocol and logistical assistance to former presidents during overseas visits, regardless of the nature of their private engagements.
He said disciplinary action against Sooklal would only be justified if there was evidence that he had advised or facilitated Zuma’s meeting with Gupta, rather than simply carrying out his official responsibilities.
Lamola, meanwhile, maintained that Zuma cannot represent South Africa’s foreign policy and warned that such engagements could negatively affect the country’s international standing.
Makhubela also argued that the controversy highlights the absence of clear legislation governing the conduct of former presidents after they leave office.
He noted that former heads of state continue to receive state-funded benefits, including security, official transport and diplomatic support, unless they are removed from office through impeachment.
According to Makhubela, the lack of clear rules governing the activities of former presidents creates opportunities for those privileges to be used in ways that may be politically controversial.