A Migrant Haven’s Regress into Exclusionary Policy

South Africa has long been a haven for refugees and migrants, especially those coming from Southern or East African nations. Fleeing persecution or poverty, climate disasters or violent conflict, millions of individuals seek out South Africa as their destination — a home away from home.

Historically, the rights of refugees and asylum seekers have been seen through a progressive lens in South Africa, in part because of the supreme law of the land. Embedded with notions of human rights, inclusivity, and equality, the country’s Constitution is considered one of the most democratic and advanced in the world. And so, South Africa is also seen as a regional leader in terms of treatment of migrants thanks to its social and political environment.

For example, unlike other African countries, refugees in South Africa are not hosted in camps. Rather, they are given a permit which grants them freedom of movement and safety from deportation while their case for refugee status is reviewed. Soon after, individuals whose claims are approved are granted most of the same rights as South African citizens. Through such measures, refugees and asylum seekers are seen not as “aliens,” but as individuals with inherent dignity deserving respect.

Recently, however, this near idyllic image of migrant rights and government practices has trickled into the traps of xenophobia. What used to be portrayed as a matter of human rights has now shifted to a narrative regarding national security — playing into right-wing, and often bigoted, views of migration.

The Refugee Amendment Act, which came into effect on January 1, 2020, further restricts many of the rights and protections offered to refugees in South Africa.

No longer are refugees able to interact or avail themselves to assistance from their home governments’ institutions and representatives, including consular services. No longer are refugees able to participate in any political activity related to their home country while in South Africa, unless given permission. No longer are refugees able to participate in political activities related to South African politics/parties either. And the list goes on; in which, all of these have the power to terminate an individual’s refugee status.

These regressive changes fundamentally undermine refugees’ right to human dignity, life, and security. Specifically, the stripping of a political voice exists at odds with the freedom of expression and association that is granted through the Constitution — not just to citizens, but to “everyone.”

Even civil society and human rights organizations, like the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, have condemned these changes, claiming they “undermine South Africa’s Constitution, Bill of Rights, and may be inconsistent with international refugee law.”

Yet, this policy change doesn’t come as surprising news; rather, it’s almost a predictable next step in the direction refugee and migration discourse is taking in South Africa. These changes to the country’s policy come amid a string of concerns regarding refugees.

• Beginning in August of 2019, an outburst of xenophobic violence led to the looting of foreign-owned shops, widespread displacement, and even the deaths of many individuals in Johannesburg, Durban, and other cities.
• In October of 2019, police officers arrested hundreds of refugees and asylum seekers who camped outside of the U.N. refugee agency in hopes of protection from the aforementioned anti-immigrant attacks.
• In January of 2020, xenophobic violence broke out in Diepsloot as residents took to the streets and targeted businesses owned by foreign nationals. Aggrieved individuals claimed to be “tired of nursing [their] alleged criminal behaviours” according to The South African.
• A study, conducted by Sikanyiso Masuku and Sharmla Ram, on the implementation of the Refugee Act revealed accusations against some municipal councillors of denying refugees the right to work or trade, violating the right to earn income outlined by the law itself.

What history has seen to be an egalitarian country, especially with the revolutionary Anti-Apartheid Movement, it is now disheartening to witness South Africa’s regression into exclusionary ideals and practices.

Ultimately, these restrictions to South Africa’s refugee policy that were created for “national security purposes” reek of marginalization and suppression. It becomes an attempt to create a second-class of people. People who are degraded and disrespected, when in reality they have the courage most don’t — to leave their homeland in search of something better, something safe.

South Africa must revert back to its true inclusive and progressive values and become a leader in migration and refugee policy once again. Not only is it their international obligation, but it is their moral duty to do so; that is, to treat those fleeing dangerous and threatening conditions with humanity, empathy, and with the rights and protections they deserve.