After being classified as a “prohibited person” on his alleged fraudulent visa, a Canadian/British citizen has approached the court to have this status lifted so he may travel in and out of South Africa.
The Western Cape High Court last week set aside the decision of the director-general of Home Affairs, which denied Robert Arthur’s application for a retired person’s visa.
Arthur, who had made an application for permanent residence in South Africa, was flagged as a “prohibited person” after he submitted an application to the Department of Home Affairs and it was discovered that he had been issued with a fraudulent temporary retired person’s visa in May 2017.
According to the judgment, Arthur, who also holds Canadian and British citizenship, had been living in South Africa on the retired person’s visa and had been travelling to and from South Africa.
Since the discovery of his alleged fraudulent visa, he has been prohibited from re-entering South Africa and had since applied to the director-general to “lift” his prohibited status, but had been unsuccessful.
“Arthur said he was entirely ignorant of the fact that he had been supplied with a fraudulent visa and that he had been using the services of an immigration agency.
Despite this explanation, the director-general rejected his application...
“After the applicant was notified that he was a prohibited person, he obtained the assistance of a firm of attorneys specialising in immigration matters in order to make an application to the director-general.
“The application was submitted on May 16, 2022. The application, itself, is somewhat confused because, at times, it reads as though it is an appeal against the decision to refuse his permanent residence application and, then on other occasions, it is framed as an application in terms of Section 29(2) of the Immigration Act… Arthur explained that the agency had assisted him in obtaining his retired person’s visa in 2017 but that he no longer had a record of the application. He said he had paid the agency R80 000 for his retired person’s visa and his permanent residence applications,” the judgment read.
The director-general denied the application by Arthur as he “was in the country on a visitor’s permit and so was not permitted to change the conditions of his visa”; that there was no record of Arthur paying the agency; and that there was no proof “that he was a victim of fraud perpetrated by the immigration agency”.
The matter was remitted to the director-general and Arthur was given 10 days to supplement his application.
Enquiries to the Department of Home Affairs and Arthur had not been answered by deadline on Sunday.
Cape Times