3 years ago
1
ARTICLE AD BOX
Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi. Photo:Elizabeth Sejake
- Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi says it is unfortunate the landing of the Emirati president in the Eastern Cape last month is compared to the Guptas' landing at Waterkloof.
- Motsoaledi insists everything was above board and all laws were complied with.
- Some ANC MPs were happy to defer their oversight responsibilities to the Public Protector, but opposition MPs want more documentary proof, which Motsoaledi must provide to the committee.
It is "unfortunate" the landing of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) president and ruler of Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed al Nahyan, and his entourage at Bulembu Airport in the Eastern Cape last month is compared to the Guptas' notorious landing at Waterkloof.
This according to Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi who briefed the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on Friday.
He insisted everything was above board with the processes his department followed in allowing "the ruler" and his entourage of 680 people entry into the country.
"As the visit involved international protocols and security matters, members of the South African Police Service and custom officials from the South African Revenue Service performed their respective statutory duties upon the arrival of the entourage," Motsoaledi said.
"A total number of 680 visitors were processed in accordance with all requisite laws of the Republic. All goods were duly processed by customs officials in line with applicable laws."
He added the same procedures were followed when they left.
READ | UAE president lands in Eastern Cape on R20m runway he built for himself and his entourage
Motsoaledi said "most of the speculations and assumptions which dominated the public discourse are simply devoid of any truth".
"The mere fact that the private visit of His Highness was not made public, does not entitle anyone to malign the government without any facts."
He added many heads of state have visited South Africa privately unannounced over the years, without providing any examples.
Motsoaledi said: "It is unfortunate that this visit of His Highness, the president of the UAE and entourage is likened to the infamous Gupta family landing at Waterkloof."
Some ANC MPs were more than happy to take Motsoaledi at his word and deferred their constitutional obligation to exercise oversight on the executive to the Public Protector.
ANC MP Bongani Bongo said:
If the minister says the laws have been complied with, that should be sufficient.
His colleague, Brandon Pillay, added: "We must be cautious and guided not to overstep our role of oversight."
EFF MP Yazini Tetyana, DA MP Angel Khanyile and IFP MP Liezl van der Merwe were unhappy with the documentation Motsoaledi provided to the committee.
Tetyana said:
So, if the minister wants to clear the innuendos, he must give us supporting documents.
"The New Dawn has promised us openness, transparency, accountability, and we've seen very little of it," said Van der Merwe.
Khanyile added: "We want to know what exactly did the minister base his decision on. And we do not have those particulars."
Committee chairperson ANC MP Musa Chabane affirmed its authority to conduct oversight over the Home Affairs portfolio.
"There is no other matter that we are not going to interact with," he said.
READ | SA can't appeal the UAE's 'inexplicable' decision not to hand over the Guptas
Chabane confirmed with Motsoaledi he had not received an official notice from the Public Protector it was investigating the matter.
Motsoaledi also preferred the committee deferred to the Public Protector's as yet unconfirmed investigation.
However, the committee will send him an official letter requesting the documents the members require, and Motsoaledi will be called to another meeting on the matter.
English (US)