Minister wont revoke Phillip Craig's permanent residency amid Cape Independence controversy

Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber has indicated that his department will not withdraw the permanent residency status of Cape Independence Advocacy Group’s Phillip Craig because MPs dislike him for his political views.

Schreiber’s stance comes as Acting Police Minister Firoz Cachalia stated that the actions of the Cape Independence Group “could not be deemed a risk to national stability”.

This also comes a week after the Home Affairs Portfolio Committee resolved to ask Schreiber and Home Affairs Director-General Tommy Makhode to clarify the options to revoke Craig’s permanent residence status after receiving a legal opinion that Makhode has the power to revoke Craig’s permanent residence.

There have been calls to revoke Craig’s permanent residency status for advocating the secession of the Western Cape, which some deem to pose threat to national security and public order.

According to the legal opinion, the Constitution made a provision for certain rights to people who were citizens, including political rights.

It also said Craig did not have a right to make political choices, which include a right to campaign for a political party or cause, because he is not a citizen, but a foreigner.

However, there must be evidence to prove that he violated one or more of the grounds listed in Section 28 of the Immigration Act.

The legal opinion stated that while the grounds for withdrawal of a permanent residence permit included conviction of a criminal offence, failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit, absence from the country for more than three years, and failure to take up residence within one year of issuance of the permanent residence permit, none arose in Craig’s case.

But ActionSA MP Lerato Ngobeni said the legal opinion confirmed that the director-general of Home Affairs may withdraw a permanent residence permit and a foreign national may be declared undesirable if their presence is contrary to the country’s public policy, national security, and/or constitutional order.

Ngobeni asked in a parliamentary question to Schreiber the reasons the department has not revoked the permanent residence permit of Craig, whose actions undermine the territorial integrity, national unity, and reconciliation project of post-apartheid South Africa.

In response, Schreiber said that the legal opinion Ngobeni referred to had concluded that none of the specified grounds existed for the withdrawal of Craig’s permit.

“In other words, the committee’s own legal advice indicates that it would be unlawful for the department to withdraw a permanent residence permit based on the facts placed before the Constitutional and Legal Services Office by the committee.”

He also said the legal opinion mirrored his repeated response that freedom of speech is sacrosanct under the Constitution and in a liberal democracy.

“Home Affairs will not weaponise South Africa’s immigration system for political purposes.”

Schreiber added that Ngobeni’s insistence that the permit be withdrawn despite the committee being in possession of independent and unambiguous legal advice that doing so will be unlawful was disturbing.

“The department is hard at work to restore the rule of law and reduce the costs of litigation, and will not violate the Constitution, the rule of law, and freedom of speech just because the honourable member dislikes someone else’s political expression.”

Meanwhile, MK Party MP Talente Kubheka asked Cachalia why Craig and the Cape Independence Advocacy Group were not investigated for treasonous conduct.

Cachalia said the Cape Independence Advocacy Group was advocating for the secession of the Western Cape from South Africa.

“To date, there have been no indications or incidents of violence, security threats, or any acts that could be deemed a risk to national stability,” he said.

Cachalia also said the conduct of Craig should be investigated by the Department of Home Affairs, due to its enabling legislation, and any criminal case docket opened against Craig will be investigated by the SAPS.

“While the group has actively sought international support for its cause, all known actions and communications remain within the bounds of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. The group’s conduct continues to align with lawful and democratic processes,” Cachalia added.