Atul Gupta Atul Gupta speaks during an interview at his home office. File picture: Paballo Thekiso
Durban - The Department of Justice on Sunday confirmed that the Interpol red notice issued for the arrest of Atul and Rajesh Gupta was still effective.
The brothers were arrested by Dubai police in June after Interpol placed Rajesh and Atul Gupta on its most-wanted list, its red notice, and are wanted in South Africa for allegedly looting billions linked to State Capture.
They were set free after a failed extradition attempt with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) having said this was due to the failure of the South African government to meet strict standards for legal documentation.
Justice Department spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said Interpol had confirmed that the red notice was still effective and active.
“This means that any country that they go out to, which is under the jurisdiction of Interpol, will have to inform us that these individuals are there.
“We can bring an extradition request to that country – even the UAE has that obligation. As it stands, they may very well be in the UAE,” Phiri said.
Responding to reports that it could take up to five years to extradite the Gupta brothers, Phiri said extraditions by their nature were protracted.
“You cannot put a time frame to an extradition matter. Sometimes it can happen very quickly and sometimes it could take up to five years, sometimes it can take longer than five years,” Phiri said in an interview.
“That is essentially the crux of the matter that we cannot put a time frame to an extradition matter.
“What is important with extradition matters is the co-operation with the State and also the legal processes of that particular country.”
Phiri said the status of the extradition process now was that Justice Minister Ronald Lamola has had a conversation with his counterpart in the UAE, expressing his disappointment in the manner in which they had handled this process.
“He also held a meeting with the ambassador of the UAE to South Africa… we stand ready to refile all of our documents.
“We have asked for a written explanation of why the warrant we had submitted, which we believe was the correct warrant, was not part of the court papers,” Phiri said.