
Dirco slams report SA collaborated with Hamas to attack Israel
The International Relations Department (Dirco) says assertions that the South African government knowingly collaborated with Hamas ahead of the October 7 attacks on Israel are a 'misstep, granting oxygen to demonstrably unverified assertions.'
Dirco was responding to journalist Paula Slier's blog post published in the Times of Israel on Friday, July 11, 2025.
'SA collaborating with Iran'
In the post, Slier writes about a $400 million lawsuit being prepared in the United States (US) against President Cyril Ramaphosa, accusing the South African government of knowingly collaborating with Hamas ahead of the October 7 attacks on Israel, attacks in which at least 47 American citizens were killed or taken hostage.
'The case, built on recommendations by UK-based consultant Justin Lewis, claims to have uncovered new material evidence of coordination between South African officials, Hamas, and Iran in the months leading up to the massacre. It's a staggering allegation: that South Africa's diplomatic support for Hamas wasn't just rhetorical solidarity, but active complicity,' Slier wrote.
'Bemusement'
In an open letter to Slier and the Times of Israel on Sunday, Dirco spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said he observed with a 'degree of bemusement Slier's recent forays into the blogosphere of the Times of Israel.'
'On July 11, 2025, you saw fit to amplify the extreme, dangerous, and unsubstantiated assertions of one Justin Lewis. A mere two days later, you claim that this is 'a lobbying and advocacy effort based on unverified allegations'.
'However, instead of apologising to your readers for violating the most basic tenets of ethical journalism, and taking steps to mitigate the damage you have caused, you chose once again to amplify these reckless allegations, vowing to pursue them, notwithstanding the lack of evidence!' Phiri wrote.
ALSO READ: Israel strikes Catholic church in Gaza, killing three [VIDEO]
Litigation
In the blog post referred to by Phiri, written by Slier two days late, wrote that while Lewis had said he submitted recommendations, 'he is not personally involved in any litigation process and cannot confirm that a lawsuit is being filed. He advises third parties who may be considering such action.'
'This does not negate the seriousness of the questions raised, nor the significance of South Africa's diplomatic posture toward Hamas and Iran, which continues to generate global concern. But it does shift the emphasis: this is not yet a legal case; it is a lobbying and advocacy effort based on unverified allegations,' Slier wrote.
'Almost all the responses to my previous blog post were positive. But I've also heard from concerned colleagues and friends in the media, urging me to look again at the man behind these claims. And they're right'.
False claims
Phiri said the claims against Pretoria are untrue.
'For the record, to say that these claims are unverified and baseless is a perfectly rational response to someone, like Mr Lewis, who clearly has a penchant for misinformation and lies.
'What is not rational is to ignore a growing body of evidence and information from experts in search of non-existent evidence that South Africa could not have possibly conceived on its own, the interpretation of upholding international law by invoking the provisions of the genocide convention,' Phiri said.
ALSO READ: Hague group announce steps to hold Israel accountable at Bogotá Summit [VIDEO]
Research
Phiri outlined desktop research points from LinkedIn that he claims could have been used to verify similar sensational claims made about the First Minister of Scotland by Lewis, who is a non-lawyer but a farmer and entrepreneur by profession.
'The 'information' you are referring to is an email to an organisation referred to as the Media Research Council (MRC) in which Mr. Lewis commenced his missive with a litany of pronouncements'.
'He proceeded to tell the MRC evidence exists confirming that the SA government, led at that time by its main political party the ANC knew about Hamas' intended attack on the state of Israel before it happened in October 2023 and that elements within the SA government, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DIRCO) (sic), actively encouraged and enjoined its support of Hamas political strategy by acting as its agent for access to the ICC and the ICJ, which access to the court (ICJ), Hamas did not have as a non-signatory, as alleged.'
SA ICJ case
According to Phiri, further details in the email state that as part of a political strategy, preparations were made prior to the October 7 atrocity against Israel, to put in place mechanisms to approach the ICC and ICJ for protection from the state of Israel's anticipated response.
'As a layman, the example I use is that of assisting a neighbour to burn his house down, then rushing to court to claim insurance protection from your insurer (as your neighbour is a non-signatory).'
'Tea One might reasonably be surprised that a mere email from a third party, clearly well-versed in the art of name-dropping luminaries—some, like Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former Chief Justice Arthur Chaskalson, no longer with us, alongside the rather incongruous mention of British royalty and former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng—could trigger a media inquiry,' Lewis wrote.
ALSO READ: Israeli strikes kill children collecting water in Gaza
'Gaping holes'
Phiri said his own 'rudimentary desktop research swiftly illuminated the gaping holes' in Lewis's narrative and credibility, including that Lewis styles himself a 'non-lawyer' yet claims to have 'worked with two Chief Justices' of our Republic.
'In what capacity? South African judges, by the very nature of our judicial system, do not conduct investigations, let alone work with members of the public directly on legal matters.'
'Misstep'
Phiri said Slier's July 11 blog entry in the Times of Israel 'regrettably mirrored this precise misstep, granting oxygen to demonstrably unverified assertions.'
'You further compounded the error by endorsing Mr Lewis's contention that the South African media had, in some grand conspiracy, ignored his 'information'. In doing so, you effectively impugned the integrity of our media as a whole, suggesting it functions as a purveyor of misinformation or propaganda.'
ALSO READ: Israel accused of starving Gaza 'by design' — South Africa addresses ICJ
No politics
Phiri added that South Africa's case against Israel has nothing to do with politics, nor with religion or ethnicity.
'It is about the conduct of a State that has signed the UN Charter, the Genocide Convention and numerous international instruments and manifestly and repeatedly violated them. It is about the equal application of international law.
'Our support for the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people is predicated on the enduring need to address the manifestation of an illegal settler colonial occupation,' Phiri said.
Mandela month
However, Slier has continued to ask whether Pretoria knew about Hamas' attack.
'The broader question: what did South Africa know about Hamas's intentions before October 7, and what role has it played diplomatically since? – remains valid and urgent. But it must be pursued through verified facts, credible sources, and balanced reporting.
'I intend to continue reporting on this story. In the coming days, I'll be speaking to a range of analysts and legal experts to assess both the claims and the implications. If evidence surfaces of collaboration, foreknowledge, or financial consequences, I will report on it. But I will do so transparently and carefully,' Slier said.
ALSO READ: Israel bombs café during children's birthday party in Gaza — 39 killed
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
US to punish top ANC officials over foreign policy, graft allegations
President Cyril Ramaphosa Former South African ambassador to US, Ebrahim Rasool. ANC first deputy secretary general Nomvula Mokonyane. South Africa's relationship with the United States is on a diplomatic knife-edge, as the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee push forward a bill that could see senior African National Congress (ANC) leaders hit with sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes. The proposed U.S. – South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025 calls for a sweeping 120-day probe into Pretoria's foreign policy stance, targeting individuals accused of corruption or of acting against American interests. The looming sanctions have intensified diplomatic tensions, placing several senior ANC figures squarely in the crosshairs. President Cyril Ramaphosa, ANC National Chairperson Gwede Mantashe, former International Relations Minister Dr. Naledi Pandor, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General Nomvula Mokonyane, and former U.S. Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool have all been flagged as potential targets of the proposed U.S. action. The bill's advancement has triggered a political storm in Pretoria, with ANC leaders condemning it as an affront to South Africa's sovereignty and its right to pursue an independent foreign policy. Although the U.S. legislation stops short of naming individuals, growing pressure is falling squarely on President Ramaphosa and his cabinet, whose diplomatic choices have increasingly drawn fire from U.S. lawmakers. At the heart of the growing rift is South Africa's vocal and consistent defence of Palestine. Pretoria has become one of the strongest international voices condemning Israel's war on Palestinians, and this has not gone unnoticed in Washington. The South African government's move to initiate a case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza was seen as a deliberate shift away from its previously neutral stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Alongside this, Pretoria's growing alignment with Russia, China, and Iran has further strained its relationship with the U.S., who view these ties as contradictory to American geopolitical interests. President Ramaphosa, who has steered South Africa's foreign policy in this direction, faces intense scrutiny. His administration's engagement with Russia and its stance on the Middle East has drawn sharp rebuke from U.S. lawmakers, who have accused South Africa of aligning with authoritarian regimes and undermining democratic values. U.S. diplomats have expressed frustration over Ramaphosa's outspoken criticism of U.S. policy, particularly on issues such as Israel and the war in Gaza. In June, IOL reported that President Ramaphosa released a cautious statement calling for dialogue and a peaceful resolution to rising geopolitical tensions. His remarks highlighted South Africa's sensitive diplomatic position, balancing its longstanding relationship with Iran and its vocal criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza. 'President Cyril Ramaphosa and the South African government have noted with a great deal of anxiety the entry by the United States of America into the Israel-Iran war," the statement read. 'It was South Africa's sincerest hope that President Donald Trump would use his influence and that of the US government to prevail on the parties to pursue a dialogue path in resolving their issues of dispute. 'South Africa calls on the United States, Israel, and Iran to give the United Nations the opportunity and space to lead on the peaceful resolution of the matters of dispute, including the inspection and verification of Iran's status of uranium enrichment, as well as its broader nuclear capacity,' the statement reads. Gwede Mantashe, serving as both ANC National Chairperson and Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, is among those who could come under scrutiny. He was named in the Zondo Commission report, which linked him to alleged corrupt dealings with the now-defunct facilities company Bosasa. The report detailed claims that Mantashe received illicit security upgrades at his properties, allegations he has consistently denied, but which continue to cast a shadow over his political standing. Nomvula Mokonyane, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General and former Minister of Environmental Affairs, also appears to be in Washington's sights. Her alleged involvement in the Bosasa corruption scandal remains a point of concern, but it is her recent proposal to rename Sandton Drive, where the U.S. Consulate is located, to 'Leila Khaled Drive' that has drawn international attention. Khaled, a Palestinian militant associated with plane hijackings and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a group designated as a terrorist organisation by the U.S., has made Mokonyane's comments especially controversial, sparking widespread outrage and potentially deepening the diplomatic rift. Then there is Dr. Naledi Pandor, South Africa's former Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, who has emerged as a central figure in the foreign policy debate. Her vocal defence of South Africa's position on Israel, along with continued diplomatic engagement with Iran and Hamas, has made her a lightning rod for criticism. U.S. lawmakers have accused Pandor of steering South Africa toward increasingly adversarial alliances, arguing that her actions are undermining the country's longstanding relationship with the West. Ibrahim Rasool, former South African Ambassador to the United States, has also come under scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers. Known for his outspoken criticism of U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding the Middle East and Israel, Rasool has often been at odds with American diplomats. His influential role in shaping the ANC's foreign policy during the Obama administration is now being reexamined amid Washington's broader review of its diplomatic relationship with South Africa. The ANC's response has been one of defiance, with ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula condemning the bill as an 'attack on our sovereignty.' Mbalula has warned that the proposed sanctions are part of a broader U.S. effort to undermine South Africa's political independence and foreign policy decisions. "There is no justification for sanctions against our leaders simply for standing up for what we believe is right, especially on the issue of Palestine," Mbalula said in a statement. While the US sanctions bill may pass into law, it is far from certain that the Trump administration will take immediate action. Joel Pollak, a former senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, suggested that the sanctions would likely be targeted at individuals deemed to be responsible for actions that go against U.S. interests. 'The Magnitsky Act is about holding people accountable for undermining democracy and supporting corrupt practices. This is not an attempt to punish South Africa, but to target those who undermine key democratic norms,' Pollak said. As the U.S. Congress moves closer to passing the bill, South Africa faces a crossroads in its relationship with the United States. Should the sanctions go ahead, it will signal a significant shift in South Africa's international standing, particularly with the U.S., and potentially mark the beginning of a new phase in its foreign policy, where its support for Palestine and criticism of Western powers takes centre stage. The Star [email protected]

IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
Under Watch: Pakistan's Journalists Struggle to Stay Afloat in a Sinking Democracy
While the South African media still enjoys constitutional protections and a relatively free press environment, Pakistan's journalists are battling to breathe amid a tightening noose drawn by military and intelligence institutions. Image: Supplied As South Africa continues its journey of democratic consolidation and media transformation, the situation in Pakistan serves as a chilling reminder of how press freedom can be slowly strangled under the guise of regulation and national security. While the South African media still enjoys constitutional protections and a relatively free press environment, Pakistan's journalists are battling to breathe amid a tightening noose drawn by military and intelligence institutions. A recent report titled ''Intimidation on All Fronts: Press Freedom and Media Safety in Pakistan'', released ahead of World Press Freedom Day 2025, paints a grim picture. Journalists in Pakistan face a growing array of threats: surveillance, legal intimidation, censorship, financial pressure, and in some cases, violent attacks. Despite constitutional guarantees, the freedom to report independently has become a high-risk act. Pakistan's history of media repression is not new. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ From the military regimes of Ayub Khan and Zia-ul-Haq to the more modern, media-savvy control strategies under Pervez Musharraf, the trend has remained the same — muzzle dissent and protect power. The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, formed in 2002, was meant to regulate broadcast media. But over time, it has morphed into a weapon used to punish outlets and journalists who challenge the state narrative. Recent developments have added digital spaces to the list of controlled domains. The Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, initially aimed at curbing cybercrime, has often been misused to target online journalists and civil society voices. Amendments passed this year have broadened the state's powers even further, allowing for arrests and censorship under vague definitions of 'offensive content.' During the 2024 general elections, media access was deliberately restricted. Entire regions, including the capital Islamabad, faced mobile and internet shutdowns, severely hampering election coverage. The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, then under the command of a retired general, enforced these blackouts on instructions from the Ministry of Interior. The timing raised serious concerns about transparency and the integrity of the electoral process. One of the most alarming proposals is the creation of the Pakistan Media Development Authority. Critics argue that it would function more as a state enforcer than a media watchdog, with powers to shut down outlets and prosecute journalists in special tribunals. Such bodies, in a democracy, would be unthinkable. But in Pakistan, they are becoming tools to silence critical reporting under a veil of legality. Economic pressure also plays a part. The government controls a large portion of advertising revenue, and this leverage is used to reward compliant media houses and starve those that refuse to toe the line. Newspapers like *Dawn* and *Daily Sahafat*, which have maintained editorial independence, have faced sharp revenue cuts, while pro-government platforms remain well-funded. But the financial and legal constraints pale in comparison to the physical dangers. Journalists are being harassed, abducted, or worse. In 2024 alone, seven journalists were killed. These included well-known names like Khalil Jibran and Saad Ahmed, whose deaths have not led to meaningful investigations or justice. The case of Arshad Sharif, shot dead in Kenya after fleeing threats in Pakistan, remains a haunting symbol of the lengths to which journalists must go to avoid repression, only to meet violence abroad. Women in the industry are also increasingly targeted. Javeria Siddique, the widow of Arshad Sharif and a journalist in her own right, has faced ongoing harassment both online and off. Such stories are no longer isolated incidents—they reflect a pattern. The Pakistan Press Foundation documented 34 cases of physical assaults, digital threats, or kidnapping in just the first half of 2025. Dozens of journalists have either been arrested or forced into exile. Even prominent figures like Imran Riaz Khan have been repeatedly detained for challenging state institutions, with little or no legal recourse. As South Africans, we should not look away. The experiences of Pakistani journalists should remind us that the freedom to write, question, and investigate must never be taken for granted. When military or political elites control narratives, societies lose not only their access to truth but also the accountability that keeps democracies a time where disinformation is rampant and authoritarian tactics are spreading across borders, the struggle of Pakistani journalists must be seen for what it is — a frontline battle for democracy. South Africa, with its hard-won media freedoms, must stand in solidarity with those who risk everything for the simple act of telling the truth.


The Citizen
8 hours ago
- The Citizen
South African woman arrested in Bali for alleged drug smuggling
Indonesia has some of the world's toughest drug laws, including the death penalty for traffickers. Two people from Brazil and South Africa have been charged in Indonesia for allegedly trying to smuggle four kilograms (8.8 pounds) of drugs into Bali, the anti-narcotics agency said Thursday. The pair were travelling separately when they were arrested on 13 July at the resort island's international airport and could face the death penalty if found guilty. The Brazilian man was allegedly carrying two plastic bags containing just over three kilograms of cocaine in his backpack and luggage, I Made Sinar Subawa, from the local anti-narcotics agency, told a news conference. ALSO READ: Child of South African drug mule in Mauritius prison to return home Made said the suspect was a courier and had been told to deliver the package to a man living in Bali. The South African woman was arrested after arriving from Singapore on the same day with nearly one kilogram of crystal methamphetamine allegedly hidden in her clothing. 'Based on the interrogation, she confessed that she was ordered to carry the meth from Johannesburg to Bali, to be delivered to someone in Bali,' Made said. Indonesia has some of the world's toughest drug laws, including the death penalty for traffickers. There are dozens of traffickers on death row in the country, including a cocaine-smuggling British grandmother. ALSO READ: OR Tambo International now a hub for drug mules — expert Indonesia last carried out executions in 2016, killing one Indonesian and three Nigerian drug convicts by firing squad. Drug smuggling cases This is not the first case of South African women being arrested in foreign countries for drug smuggling. Mauritius has seen multiple arrests of South African women involved in drug trafficking. A South African woman was arrested after allegedly being caught with drugs with an estimated value of Rs 8 million (just over R3.3 million) at the Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam Airport in Mauritius on 17 September 2019. ALSO READ: Cocaine on a plane at OR Tambo – again: Drug mule nabbed with 33 'bullets' Mauritius' Anti-Drug and Smuggling Unit (ADSU) in collaboration with the officers of the Customs Anti-Narcotics Section of the MRA intercepted the woman coming from Reunion after being alerted of the 'suspicious behaviour' of the woman. The woman, 34-year-old Nokuphila Mtshali, from KwaZulu-Natal, reportedly introduced herself as a businesswoman who would be on the island for five days. The officials searched her and found three plastic-wrapped bundles in her private parts containing 528 grams of heroin. The woman reportedly cooperated with the officials, who arranged a fake delivery with fake drugs in an attempt to find her accomplices, reported Mauritius' The fake delivery led to the arrest of two Nigerian men, Ndubuisi Samuel Ebielonwu, 33, and Eze Collins, 31, and police confiscated an iPhone and cash in rands, Mauritian rupees, US dollar and naira. The woman was reportedly promised R40,000 for a successful delivery. ALSO READ: SA woman arrested for 'drugs in vagina' for two Nigerians in Mauritius A year before, 30-year-old Thami Nomathamsanqa Dyasi was allegedly caught with pellets of heroin weighing more than 1.25kg concealed in her private parts and stomach, according to Mauritian reports. Additional reporting by Vhahangwele Nemakonde