No legal reason for Gupta passport denial, court told
The Department of Home Affairs has filed the record of its decision to refuse to issue one of the Gupta brothers with a South African passport.
But, observes a News24 report, in papers filed in the Gauteng High Court, Atul Gupta's lawyer, Rudi Krause, said the record revealed that the decision ‘was taken in bad faith’.
In his supplementary affidavit, Krause said the passport was denied without any legal justification and on the ‘unlawful say-so’ of Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi.
Gupta, who fled SA to Dubai amid corruption allegations, now wants the respondents to pay the legal costs of the application.
Krause also said the department did not inform his client that a final decision regarding his passport was made and that he was ‘left to speculate’.
‘They (the respondents) appear hell-bent on treating the applicant (Gupta) with contempt and in violation of his rights. It is submitted that this court should mark its displeasure with this conduct, viewed holistically.’
Krause said his client wants the decision of a delegate of the DG to reject his application for a passport, to be reviewed and set aside.
The decision was taken on 25 September 2020 and the delegate's ‘identity is unknown to the applicant’.
The main application was brought in terms of Rule 53, which determines that an organ of state that takes an administrative decision must provide the court, upon application, with the record of the decision.
Krause submitted that the Rule 53 record contained no substantive justification for the rejection of the 2018 passport application.
He also said there was no evidence that Regulation 14 of the South African Passports and Travel Documents Regulations was considered at all.
Article disclaimer: While we have made every effort to ensure the accuracy of this article, it is not intended to provide final legal advice as facts and situations will differ from case to case, and therefore specific legal advice should be sought with a lawyer.
