PRESS STATEMENT: LHR and ACMS report reveals major policy shifts in asylum system

Since early 2011, these shifts have resulted in group exclusion, access barriers, the limitation of basic rights, the closure of existing refugee reception offices with the intention to move them to borderlines and finally backlogs in appeal cases due to the restructuring and under-capacitation of the Refugee Appeals Board.

LHR has noted that:

• The changes have not been preceded by explicit policy documents;
• There is no clear statement of the intended strategic aims of shifts;
• Practices either conflict with or contravene the law;
• Shifts are already proving to have counter-productive effects;
• There has been no meaningful substantive consultation.

There are compelling reasons why South Africa’s asylum policy development should be of concern to actors beyond home affairs, asylum-seekers/refugees and NGOs operating in this sector.

Immigration policy impacts on a wide range of stakeholders despite its low level of perceived importance to the citizenry. There are implications for the respect for constitutional rights and administrative justice, for the rational use of tax monies as well as public health concerns.

Since 2011, the government and the ANC have viewed the management of asylum as a question of security and have reoriented home affairs as a security department. As stated in the ANC’s 2012 Peace and Stability policy document, “as a security department, home affairs will contribute to achieving two overriding goals: national security and public safety”. No evidence is provided of how asylum-seekers and refugees pose a security challenge to South Africa.

According to Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, who heads LHR’s Refugee and Migrants Rights Programme, “LHR is particularly concerned that the state has been preoccupied with asylum-seeker numbers and this has been a major driving force behind the new policies and irregular practices which have developed in the last two years.  There is also an increased focus on security and this is being directed at efforts to prevent and limit asylum seekers from entering and residing legally in the country”.

A further factor motivating changes, as noted repeatedly by home affairs officials, is the question of numbers. According to UNHCR global statistics, South Africa saw the largest number of asylum-seekers annually around 2008, the year in which asylum-seeker numbers quadrupled compared with the previous year.

This reinforced perceptions that South Africa was being ‘flooded’ with asylum-seekers but according to unofficial home affairs statistics, there has been a decrease in the number of new asylum-seekers entering and applying since 2009 which does not seem to support these statements from Home Affairs. These statistics indicate that South Africa has been receiving the following numbers of new asylum seekers in these years:

2009: 341 000

2010: 220 000

2011: 106 000

2012: 51 000

The closure and relocation of refugee reception offices
Since mid-2011, Home Affairs has closed several refugee reception offices, including in Johannesburg, Port Elizabeth and Cape Town and expressed its intention to move RROs from major cities to border lines.

This proposed move impacts on the basic principles of asylum protection, particularly with regard to access, administrative efficiency and fairness. It also has severe economic and safety implications for asylum-seekers and refugees. A further concern over the closure of existing urban RROs is the significant cost which will need to be carried by taxpayers.

The provision of shelter and basic services would be required to keep asylum-seekers in border areas while they are accessing asylum services and if adequate provisions are not made by Home Affairs a humanitarian emergency is likely to result.

It is feared that moving RROs will be coupled with the de facto detention of asylum-seekers and Home Affairs must detail any intention to detain asylum-seekers and what form such detention would take.

Findings and recommendations
This report is based on the belief that revised government policies should meet basic criteria to enable South Africa to meet its domestic and international commitments.

Policies and practices should be clearly formulated, justified and communicated, respond to clear strategic aims and be developed in consultation with affected constituencies.

LHR calls on the office of the public protector to investigate border officials denying entry to asylum-seekers, to investigate the extent to which the proposed move of RROs is a cost effective and administratively appropriate strategy and whether it fulfills statutory requirements.

We also call on the public protector to investigate home affairs’ repeated non-compliance with court orders regarding the closure of RROs and in other asylum and detention related matters.