Edwin Okey Chikata Ijeoma, a professor of public sector economics at the University of Fort Hare, had his citizenship revoked by the ministry of home affairs after he fraudulently relied on a bigamous marriage to a South African woman to obtain naturalisation and citizenship.
Edwin Okey Chikata Ijeoma was no intellectual slouch when he arrived in SA from Nigeria on a study permit in 1998 to pursue academic studies at the University of Pretoria. His hard work saw him obtain a PhD in economics in 2003.
However, the man who became professor of public sector economics at the University of Fort Hare (UFH) in the Eastern Cape had his citizenship revoked by the ministry of home affairs after he fraudulently relied on a bigamous marriage to a South African woman to obtain naturalisation and citizenship.
Ijeoma took home affairs on review to the Bhisho high court, but in a 2020 judgment the court held the minister had not erred in finding Ijeoma had made false representations about his marital status to the department or in determining his SA citizenship was null and void.
Acting judge Mickey Mfenyana has denied Ijeoma leave to appeal her ruling, stating another court will not differ from her finding that he was disingenuous, if not dishonest, and that there was no reason to interfere with the minister’s decision.
The confirmation of the home affairs action rendering him an undesirable inhabitant of the country means Ijeoma, who previously renounced his Nigerian citizenship, has nowhere else to go.
The head of the UFH school of public administration is under suspension by the university in connection with the illegal registration of axed health MEC Sindiswa Gomba for an honours degree in public administration when she was not entitled to register for postgraduate studies.
Ijeoma was granted permanent residence in SA in the same year he graduated from Tukkies, having been exempted from immigration restrictions due to his marriage to a local woman two years earlier. In 2005 he was granted SA citizenship through naturalisation but by 2007 he had divorced his South African wife, ostensibly because the couple was unable to conceive a child.
He was then joined in SA by a Nigerian woman, Anne Tomo. Home affairs officials were tipped off that Ijeoma had committed bigamy by marrying the SA woman after Tomo in her application for permanent residence, attached a copy of her 1993 marriage to him in Nigeria.
Officials said Ijeoma’s sole mission in marrying the SA woman was to acquire citizenship.
In her original judgment, Mfenyana found Ijeoma had presented contradictory reasons for his bigamous actions â€` that, as an African man, he believed he was entitled to marry more than one wife; and that he represented himself as single because he was not aware SA recognised

customary marriages.
She said he failed to disclose the existence of his marriage in Nigeria on three occasions: when he applied for permanent residence in SA, when he got married in the country and when he applied for citizenship.
Slating the highly qualified academic “who by his own admission is of good and sound mind and an intellectual giant”, she said it was highly improbable that, throughout his stay in the country and his encounters with immigration matters, he remained ignorant of the implications of not disclosing his Nigerian marriage.
Ijeoma told the court he obtained a permanent residence permit because of his “good and sound character” rather than his marriage to the SA woman.
He said home affairs had failed to take into account his contribution to SA as a result of his work as an academic and within the New Partnership for Africa’s Development.
Mfenyana said the exemption certificate clearly indicated the marriage was the basis for his exemption and Ijeoma had also admitted during a 2015 plea for home affairs to have compassion on him, that he obtained citizenship by naturalisation as a result of the marriage.
Home affairs provided the court with the certificate for Ijeoma’s marriage in Nigeria to dispel the notion it was a customary marriage. In any case, the Nigeria Marriage Act prohibited marriage where one of the parties was already married to another person under customary law.
In two immigration submissions in SA, when he had to indicate an immediate family member still residing in Nigeria, Ijeoma listed Anne Ijeoma as his sister.
Officials also said Ijeoma would have remained a permanent resident for five years had he not been exempted because of his marriage to the SA citizen.
Mfenyana said the court’s role was not to reconsider the minister’s decision but to review it for legality and reasonableness. The court found the minister was bound by the law, which determined the misrepresentation which Ijeoma had committed was a criminal offence.
UFH spokesperson Thandi Mapukata said she would need time to check with the university’s human resources department what steps might be taken after the court’s finding against Ijeoma.
“The university wasn’t aware of this development until now. We will contact law enforcement agencies to obtain a full briefing.”
Mapukata declined to provide a reason for Ijeoma’s suspension, but Dispatch reported in October last year that it was related to Gomba’s illegal registration.
www.samigration.com V.3465

One of the highlighted topics: Critical Skills Visa.

- Key Insight: Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast track to working in South Afr...
- This matter relates to critical skills visa and its broader implications.
- Individuals are advised to seek professional guidance.

Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast trac V.6139
Click here for full article

One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, became a victim of identity theft in 2012 when fraudulent transactions occurred, using her personal details.

-The Pretoria High Court found that the department of home affairs had violated constitutional rights without due process.
-Only half of Lawyers for Human Rights` test group has been unblocked, while 385 000 identities remain blocked nationwide.
-LHR appeals extension, urges affected people to seek help now.

Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) are intensifying pressure on the department of home affairs over the national ID-blocking crisis, accusing the state of acting too slowly to unblock qualifying individuals despite a landmark court ruling.

In January last year, the Pretoria High Court found that the department`s practice of blocking IDs without due process was unlawful and unconstitutional. One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, a Swati citizen and South African permanent resident since 1998, fell victim to identity theft in 2012 when fraudsters used her personal details.

 V.6133
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6128
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6129
Click here for full article

A Washington state mother and her 6-year-old son have been released after spending more than three weeks in US immigration detention due to a brief trip to Canada and a small paperwork mistake, her attorney told CNN on Saturday.

Sarah Shaw, a New Zealand citizen who has lived legally in the US since she arrived in 2021, was detained at the Blaine, Washington, Customs and Border Protection checkpoint when returning home after dropping her two oldest children off at the Vancouver airport for a flight to visit their grandparents in New Zealand. Shaw, 33, chose the flight out of Vancouver because it was direct and she didn`t want her children to have to navigate a layover alone, her attorney Minda Thorward, told CNN.

 V.6130
Click here for full article

On 22 July 2025, the Gauteng High Court dismissed Sitrusrand Boerdery`s review of the Department of Employment and Labour`s refusal to issue a Working Conditions and Salary Benchmarking Certificate, an essential precondition for obtaining corporate visas under the Immigration Act.

Acting Judge Kekana AJ held that the Department`s decision was lawful, rational and procedurally fair. This judgment illustrates how businesses can - and must - structure their corporate visa applications to meet statutory requirements, and how legal practitioners should prepare robust review challenges when administrative authorities decline to recommend foreign-work permits.

 V.6131
Click here for full article

The United States could forfeit an estimated 9.4 billion dollars in visitor spending over the next three years following the introduction of a new 250 dollars `visa integrity fee,` according to industry groups, who warn the policy risks undermining tourism and costing thousands of jobs.
The United States’ decision to introduce a 250 dollars `visa integrity fee` on international visitors has triggered sharp criticism from the global tourism industry, with officials warning that the measure could deter millions of travellers and cost the U.S. economy billions.
The 250dollar `visa integrity fee,` part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed on July 4, 2025, will take effect later this year. According to immigration law firm Envoy Global, it applies to all nonimmigrant visa holders which include students, tourists, temporary workers, and business visitors particularly from African countries. V.6132
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6127
Click here for full article

1. Right to Legal Representation•You have the right to consult with a legal representative.•Contact an immigration practitioner, legal aid clinic, or attorney urgently.•Do not sign any documents without understanding them fully. 2. Section 34 of the Immigration Act•You must be brought to court with 48 hours to confirm arrest but you can remain locked up very long as courts figure out what to do with you •If you`re found to be illegally in South Africa, you may be detained for up to 30 days (extendable by a magistrate) pending deportation.•BUT this cannot happen arbitrarily. You must be informed of your rights, and Home Affairs must follow due process.- becomes a nightmare , you could lose your job , business , place to stay V.6121
Click here for full article

Driving for Bolt, Uber, Mr D, or Checkers Sixty60?If you`re undocumented, you`re risking more than just your income.The Risks if You`re Not Legal: - Vehicle impoundment - Heavy fines - Arrest & deportation - Permanent bans from working in SA V.6122
Click here for full article