South Africa's firebrand politician banned from entering UK
A controversial South African politician central to a row over race relations in the country has been denied entry to the UK.
The Home Office said Julius Malema had been deemed "non-conducive to the public good" and that it was "undesirable" to grant him entry.
In a letter published by local media outlet News 24, the UK government cited his vocal support for Hamas, including a speech he made after the 7 October attacks in which he said his own party would arm the group if it came into power.
The UK also raised his threat to call for the "slaughter of white people" and to "take up arms" as a reason for the rejection.
His Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) party, which came fourth in South Africa's parliamentary election last year, condemned the decision as "cowardice" and said it would stifle democratic debate.
Malema featured prominently in a video played last month by President Donald Trump during a visit by South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to the White House.
This is the second time Malema has been denied entry to the UK in just two months.
The first time the UK government said he had submitted his application too late – this time, a British official in South Africa told the BBC it was a "substantive decision".
The UK said he has no right of appeal and was likely to be denied any future applications, according to News 24.
Unpacking the South African land law that so inflames Trump
Is there a genocide of white South Africans as Trump claims?
Fact-checking Trump's Oval Office confrontation with Ramaphosa
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Focus on Africa
This Is Africa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
41 minutes ago
- Yahoo
"A Phone So Sh*tty You Won't Want To Use It": The Internet Is Clowning Donald Trump So Hard For His Bizarre Comments Following The Launch Of "Trump Mobile"
President Donald Trump faced ridicule on Tuesday as critics suggested he'd delivered the perfect anti-advertisement for the newly launched Trump-branded smartphone. Just hours after the Trump Organization unveiled its latest venture — 'Trump Mobile' — the president said he doesn't 'believe in telephones.' Trump made the comment while explaining to reporters on Air Force One why he cut short his attendance at the G7 summit in Canada. Trump said he left the gathering of world leaders early to return to Washington, D.C., so that he could address rising tensions between Israel and Iran. atrupar / X / Via When asked what he could do in the US capital that he couldn't do in Canada, Trump responded: 'Just be a little bit, I think, more well-versed. Not having to use telephones so much, because I don't believe in telephones. Because people like you listen to them, you know, so being on the scene is much better.' Critics highlighted the irony, noting how Trump's dismissal of telephones clashed with the announcement of the phone company. Related: "Honestly Speechless At How Evil This Is": 26 Brutal, Brutal, Brutal Political Tweets Of The Week Related: "Let Them Eat Teslas": People At The "No Kings" Protests This Weekend Brought Signs That Were So Clever I'm Still Laughing About Them implausibleblog / X / Via This article originally appeared on HuffPost. Also in In the News: This Conservative Said He Wears A Fake ICE Uniform For A Really, Really, Really Gross Reason Also in In the News: This Dem Lawmaker Is Going Viral For His Extremely Shady Question To Secretary Kristi Noem Also in In the News: MAGA Really, Really, Really, Really, Really, Really, Really Doesn't Like This Army Vet's Now-Viral Speech
New York Post
42 minutes ago
- New York Post
What Team Trump must do to get deportations right
When it comes to illegal-migrant deportations, President Donald Trump stressed last week, 'We're going to have to use a lot of common sense.' That principle must keep guiding his team's drive to expel the millions of 'asylum seekers' the last guy waved in. In particular, Deputy White House Chief of Staff Stephen Miller's demand that ICE now aim for 3,000 arrests a day is asking for trouble. Advertisement First, that's impossible if Homeland Security boss Kristi Noem's people focus mainly on the resource-intensive work of going after the worst-of-the-worst — even though those are the deportations with the most overwhelming public support. Second, hitting the quota almost requires the kind of mass roundups that are the highest-risk, public-opinion-wise. Advertisement And which are also likely to capture pre-Biden (and even pre-Obama) illegal immigrants who've managed to put down some roots — and so prompt the kind of economic troubles that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins warned of, such as 'severe disruptions to our food supply.' But the president can't, and won't, simply abandon one of his central campaign promises —nor should he. So far, that's meant a zig-zag: 'Changes are coming,' Trump vowed, and a top ICE official then ordered a 'hold on all work site enforcement investigations/operations on agriculture,' restaurants and hotels — only for top Homeland Security brass to order a resumption of such raids Advertisement Even it out, people: Common sense, remember. First, keep pushing self-deportation, which is cheaper than arresting and removing people. Nearly 1 million have already voluntarily left under Trump, per some estimate. The president is wise to offer migrants an incentive — $1,000, a one-way flight out of the country and no black mark on your record if you seek to immigrate legally — to self-deport. Second, balance goals and resources. The Big Beautiful Bill will fund 10,000 new ICE officers and 3,000 border agents (as well as more self-deport grants ) — but until that passes, Miller's quotas are going to force ICE to focus on lower-priority targets. Advertisement Third, make it clear — to both migrants and employers — that widespread reliance on illegal labor can't continue. Since 1986, the law has required businesses to verify workers' eligibility, but enforcement's been a joke. That must change — but a gradual transition is key to minimizing economic disruptions. Bottom line: Trump won election vowing to secure the border and to deport illegal migrants; he's done the first and will keep working on the second. But as he himself acknowledged, implementation sometimes requires a scalpel, not a hammer, to avoid needless harm — and major political pain.
CNBC
an hour ago
- CNBC
Senate version of Trump's budget bill includes a new tax break worth up to $2,000—around 90% of filers could take advantage
Congress will soon begin a reconciliation process for the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act — President Donald Trump's sweeping tax reform and spending bill, which Republicans hope to bring to the President's desk by July 4. The bill promises continuity for taxpayers by permanently extending the cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as well as a raft of new cuts, including breaks for tipped and overtime income. Both the House and Senate versions of the bill also include a throwback: an above-the-line deduction on charitable contributions. The House version allows taxpayers who don't itemize to deduct $150 ($300 for joint filers) in charitable contributions from their taxable income through 2028 — a tax rule you may remember from a similar provision of the CARES Act, which expired in 2021. The Senate version is even more generous, with permanent deductions of up to $1,000 for single filers and $2,000 for married couples filing jointly. "This could provide some tax savings for folks," says Erica York, vice president of federal tax policy at the Tax Foundation. "That could be something unexpected if you're not currently deducting charitable giving." Most people don't deduct charitable contributions — and it's not because they're not generous or don't want a tax break. Other than under the Covid-19 relief bill, taxpayers generally have had to itemize deductions in order to get a break for charitable giving. For most people, that doesn't make sense. Some 9 in 10 taxpayers take the standard deduction, which in 2025 is $15,000 for singles and $30,000 for joint filers. You'd typically only itemize if the sum of your deductions would save you more money than just taking the standard deduction. In short, the legislation currently bouncing around Congress would, at least temporarily, allow anyone who donates to charity to get a tax break — not just the mega-philanthropists among us. Because these deductions reduce your taxable income, they're the most beneficial for people in the highest tax brackets. A $1,000 deduction from income is effectively worth $100 to someone in the 10% tax bracket. The same deduction is worth $350 to someone in the 35% bracket. Should some version of the provision become law, you'll still have to follow the IRS' rules on charitable giving. Donations must be made to qualifying charitable organizations — donations to political campaigns, crowdfunding efforts and, in the case of the proposed tax break, donor-advised funds won't be eligible. Before you make a donation you plan on deducting, check the IRS' search tool to make sure the organization is tax-exempt. And be sure to get a receipt for your donation; the IRS generally requires written acknowledgement of any donation in excess of $250.
