The drama surrounding the mother of Nigerian beauty queen and model, Chidimma Adetshina, took a tense turn on Friday when Anabela Rungo, who is facing serious immigration-related charges, appeared for her bail hearing. Rungo, 45, was arrested in Cape Town on February 15 for allegedly falsifying documents to fraudulently obtain South African citizenship. She was charged with violating both the Immigration Act and the Identification Act.
Rungo, who has been held in custody since her arrest, pleaded for her release during the hearing at the Cape Town Magistrate’s Court, insisting that she is innocent of the charges and would not undermine public peace if granted bail.
“I believe I am innocent and will be acquitted. My release would not undermine public peace,” Rungo told the court, her voice unwavering despite the serious nature of the accusations.
Her legal team, led by defence attorney Ben Mathewson, argued that Rungo’s release on bail was in the interest of justice. Mathewson presented an affidavit that outlined Rungo’s health condition and her family responsibilities, particularly for her young grandson, who has been struggling since her detention.
The affidavit highlighted that Rungo lived with her husband Michael in the Cape Town suburb of Summer Greens and helped care for her daughter’s child. Her legal team expressed concerns about her health deteriorating while incarcerated, citing her need for medication, which they argued was unavailable under the unsanitary conditions at Pollsmoor Prison.
However, the case against Rungo appears to be strong, as outlined by immigration officer Adrian Jackson, who testified during the hearing. Jackson revealed that Rungo had applied for South African residency in 2016, but her application had been rejected due to failure to meet financial requirements. Subsequently, she had presented a bank statement to appeal the rejection, which officials later discovered was fraudulent.
Despite being informed about the rejection, Rungo allegedly proceeded to apply for an ID under the name Sara Moyo. The immigration authorities had sent multiple notifications to her warning of the revocation of her ID, but Rungo failed to respond to these warnings. In a twist, the court heard that these notifications were sent via WhatsApp, as Rungo could not be physically traced.
Magistrate Sadiqah Guendouz, who is overseeing the case, listened carefully as Jackson detailed how Rungo was arrested on February 15 at a residence in Summer Greens, a neighborhood she had been living in despite the revocation of her identity documents. Jackson emphasized that the charges against Rungo were serious and stemmed from her alleged identity fraud and violation of South African immigration laws.
Though the accused has no previous criminal record, Magistrate Guendouz expressed concerns about the nature of the charges and the potential flight risk that could arise if Rungo were granted bail. The court also heard that Rungo, who only holds a Mozambican passport, could be considered an undesirable or prohibited person in the eyes of South African immigration laws.
In response, Rungo’s defence team argued that she should be granted bail as she had no knowledge of being an undesirable person and had not received formal communication that would suggest her status in South Africa was illegal. Her legal representative insisted that the available evidence, at this stage, favored her release on bail.
“I have no knowledge of being an undesirable or prohibited person,” Rungo said, repeating her claim of innocence. “I should be released on bail as I am being charged with an offence for which I have not committed.”
At the heart of the dispute lies the question of whether Rungo intentionally sought to deceive immigration authorities, as well as the credibility of the evidence gathered by South African officials. Rungo’s defence attorney further emphasized that the bail conditions set at R3,000 (about 30,000 Nigerian Naira) were not beyond her client’s means, and there were no outstanding warrants or pending applications against her.
Despite the passionate arguments from Rungo’s legal team, Magistrate Guendouz ruled to deny her bail, citing the seriousness of the charges and the potential flight risk.
The case, which has already attracted significant public attention due to the high profile of Chidimma Adetshina, will continue with a further postponement scheduled for February 26. Rungo, meanwhile, remains in custody as she faces the full weight of the legal system in South Africa.
Contextualizing the Case:
Rungo’s case has drawn considerable attention not only due to her status as the mother of a well-known Nigerian celebrity but also because of the broader implications it could have on immigration practices in South Africa. The country has faced increasing challenges regarding identity fraud, especially as it pertains to individuals attempting to obtain residency or citizenship through fraudulent means.
South Africa has long struggled with irregular immigration, and the government has taken a stern approach to addressing identity fraud. In recent years, the country has seen an uptick in cases involving falsified documents, ranging from fraudulent marriage certificates to fake bank statements used to circumvent residency requirements.
In 2016, Rungo applied for permanent residency in South Africa but was rejected after failing to meet the financial criteria required for approval. South African immigration officials allege that this rejection was followed by an attempt to manipulate the system through falsified documents, including a fraudulent bank statement and ID application under a different name.
While Rungo’s legal team insists that the charges against her are exaggerated, the case highlights the complexities surrounding South Africa’s immigration policies and the increasing scrutiny placed on applicants seeking permanent residency or citizenship.
As the case progresses, many are watching closely to see whether Rungo will be granted bail or if her legal battle will continue behind bars. Given her high-profile connection to Chidimma Adetshina, the story is likely to remain in the spotlight in both South Africa and Nigeria, raising questions about immigration law enforcement and the intersections of celebrity culture and legal challenges.
With the trial scheduled to resume on February 26, all eyes are on the Cape Town court, as this case could set important precedents for future immigration fraud cases in South Africa.
