Press Release: LHR appeals high court dismissal of Somali Association of South Africa & 5 Others v Limpopo Department of Economic Development, the Environment and Tourism and 9 Others

Somali Association of South Africa & 5 Others v Limpopo Department of Economic Development, the Environment and Tourism and 9 Others

Lawyers for Human Rights appeared in the Supreme Court of SA on 16th September to appeal the dismissal of the case that challenged the unlawful closure of refugee and asylum-seeker traders’ informal businesses by the police. The challenge comes in the light of the right to work and trade as refugees and asylum-seekers in South Africa.

In July 2013, LHR brought an application in the North Gauteng High Court against the Limpopo provincial government, the South African Police Services, the Department of Home Affairs and several others on behalf of the traders, arguing that refugees and asylum-seekers living in South Africa legally were "entitled to trade and operate businesses to earn a living in circumstances where they had no other means of livelihood". The application was dismissed in September by Judge Natvarlal Ranchod.
LHR, representing the Somali Association of South Africa and the Ethiopian Community of South Africa, has now appealed this case before a full bench of the Supreme Court.

Counsel for Home Affairs and the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs held the position that refugees and asylum seekers had no right to self-employment and therefore could not be issued with licences to run small businesses.
Counsel for the Police refused to back down on the position that there is a distinction between wage-earning employment and self-employment.
The Court commented that it could not understand the reason or logic behind the respondents diverging positons and requested that the various state parties arrive at a common position. However this was not forthcoming.

According to LHR attorney Anjuli Maistry, “LHR holds the position that where the inability to trade means that asylum seekers and refugees have no other way of supporting themselves, this is an unjustifiable limitation of their dignity”.
Over several months in 2012 and 2013 police in the Limpopo province carried out a crackdown on businesses which were perceived to be operating illegally. The crackdown known as “Operation Hardstick” saw police closing businesses and confiscating the stock of refugee and asylum-seeker traders. The closures and confiscations led to the traders losing their livelihoods. These are largely small tuckshops and spaza shops operating in remote areas in Limpopo.

SAPS apparently introduced Operation Hardstick in an alleged effort to stop the operation of illegal businesses in Limpopo but this operation has had the effect of closing down many small businesses run by asylum-seekers and refugees. These closures have targeted small businesses owned by asylum-seekers and recognised refugees resulting in the unfair, inequitable and illegal treatment of asylum‐seekers and refugees.
Refugees and asylum-seekers are often unable to find stable work in South Africa and without informal employment, they are deprived of their only means of financial support. They have been left destitute and in some cases homeless.
According to ECSA Chairperson Tamiru Woubet “many refugees and asylum-seekers in Limpopo still suffer from the effects of Operation Hardstick. They just want this to crackdown to be over.”

LHR was represented by advocates Kate Hofmeyr, Nick Ferreira and Dave Watson.