The grapevine has it that dedicated teams within one or more of the ‘Big Four’ global accounting firms might be currently responsible in some shape or form for the processing of visa applications.
In late August, while promoting his department’s digital transformation, the new Minister of Home Affairs, Leon Schreiber, stated that “the permitting backlog … dates back a decade … [and] started out at over 306,000 unprocessed applications”.
The harsh reality of the visa backlog Schreiber found himself and his department having to contend with was far worse than anticipated even in previous detailed reports to the portfolio committee. Until as recently as April this year, the now-debunked Department of Home Affairs’ (DHA) predominant narrative surrounding the backlog was that it stood at 80,000 applications and was primarily a result of the lockdown and the pandemic.
I have already voiced our reservations and caution in response to Schreiber’s digitisation “one-stop” answer to solving the department’s long-standing capacity and training shortages. The departmental issues, in our view, need to be resolved by promoting long-term recruitment and upskilling strategies rather than to meet short-term goals and political aspirations.
While basic civic services, such as obtaining or replacing an ID, passport or certificate, will undoubtedly benefit from the proposed innovation, streamlining through digital automation of the processing of immigration-related applications carries multiple risks that may ultimately outweigh the benefits. These include unlawful and incorrect decisions, security risks, breach of personal data, etc.
#TeamHomeAffairs?
From his five-year digitisation strategy to outsourcing partnerships, it appears that the minister’s solutions tend to diverge from the department’s own human resources constraints. In his race to preserve the perception of service delivery, Schreiber has found himself having to contend with the persisting capacity shortage as the DHA is said to have “only 40% of the staff it requires to function optimally”, and has had to grapple with a lack of work ethics and, as he called it, “institutional vandalism”.
Apparently, certain officials within the DHA’s ranks remain reluctant to work overtime and embrace innovation and change.
Notwithstanding these challenges, the Minister confirmed that “a team from different departments within Home Affairs is working around the clock, in partnership with Business Unity South Africa and Deloitte, to clear the backlog”.
The grapevine has it that dedicated teams within one or more of the “Big Four” global accounting firms might be currently responsible in some shape or form for the processing of applications. These rumours leave us to wonder if these “partner teams” are responsible for the review of highly confidential personal documents included in applications, and for making recommendations on the outcomes to be issued – visas or rejections.
These partnerships that Schreiber implemented, we are told, allegedly included a few weeks’ “crash course” on South African immigration provided by the DHA to these external service providers.
A sceptic would say that the blind have been leading the blind … the #TeamHomeAffairs that Schreiber often praises on social media may well not be fully within Home Affairs after all. Should this be confirmed, an arrangement of this nature would not merely be unusual but also questionable.
An unprecedented agreement
Already in 2014 , the service agreement which the DHA entered into with VFS Global was unique and controversial. At the time, VFS Global formed part of the Kuoni Group, a publicly listed Swiss company with large holdings in travel and tourism providing services to a range of countries. Exorbitant government tenders were awarded over the years to VFS Global including, among others, the UK, Australia and Canada.
Today, VFS Global has agreements in place with 69 governments and operates in 153 countries with more than 3,400 visa processing centres globally and counting. All of these tenders and agreements relate to the processing of visas and are provided from outside the sovereign territory towards which these services are rendered.
Within the UAE, as a small deviation, VFS strictly deals with short-term (30–60 day) visa extensions.
In an era of rapidly growing international travel, many governments have contracted with outside parties, such as VFS, to handle their visa processes, as this has allowed them to manage the rising demand for visas. Travellers, in general, also ostensibly gain from visa outsourcing since it speeds up processing and enhances customer support while also increasing geographical accessibility.
However, the 2014 agreement made by the DHA in South Africa with VFS to date represents the only instance in which a sovereign government has delegated and outsourced within its own territory and within its own borders its public functions for these services.
That agreement alone should have been a warning sign of the department’s mismanagement and brewing crisis, and 10 years later stands as a sign of an incapable state.
Further aggravating the controversy, the 2014 agreement came at a high cost for visa and permit applicants in South Africa, as it sanctions the charge by VFS Global of a service fee (initially R1,350, now increased to R1,550 per application, waiver, appeal, permit, etc) to be paid over and above the fees charged by the DHA.
This said, it must be acknowledged and recognised that had it not been for VFS Global, the South African immigration system would have already collapsed completely a decade ago, with far worse damage than Schreiber is now being tasked to control.
Outsourcing patterns
Over the last decade, the DHA’s service provision relating to immigration services has increasingly relied on outsourced and delegated services. While in 2021 the Department of |International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) downsized South African representation abroad by closing 10 of its missions, agreements made by the DHA with VFS have increased to currently cover 20 countries.
The South African exception, both in respect of the 2014 agreement with VFS and now with the reliance on external “partner teams” to deal with the backlog, is prima facie evidence that oftentimes public service employees lack the ability and resolution to be upskilled and meet international standards.
This is sadly ironic considering the predominantly labour-protective immigration regime South Africa has promoted over the years.
Rejection patterns
As we fast approach the end of 2024, and as widely publicised by the minister and the department, the progress on the backlog seems to be making giant leaps. The DHA has reportedly succeeded in zeroing a backlog of 247,500 ID applications in a few months, and has proudly reduced the visa backlog by 62% while confirming to be on track with the year-end goal.
That visa outcomes are suddenly being flushed out in high numbers is evident simply by visiting any VFS Global office where the waiting time for a simple collection has dramatically increased to three to four hours or even longer. These volumes have undoubtedly put a strain on VFS Global’s capacity and staff, and of course on applicants.
Of graver concern, however, is the combined negative impact that lies in the poor quality of decisions being rendered lately. In the past couple of weeks, our law firm has been inundated by inquiries from the public relating to the collection of unprecedented numbers of rejections on visa applications, many of which bear anomalous and erroneous reasons for the refusals.
Quality vs quantity
Issues with the quality of decisions are not a novelty of the DHA or the backlog clearing process. The lack of proper legal training combined with the necessary delegation of adjudicating functions within the DHA carries this consequence. Much of the same has been said in respect of the decisions rendered abroad on visa applications processed and adjudicated by Dirco at certain overseas South African missions.
Applicants have already been gravely prejudiced by the DHA’s inability to perform after the lockdown, often finding themselves displaced, disillusioned and despondent in a state of continued uncertainty. Most applicants have had no choice but to exercise patience, others have approached the courts simply to review and set aside the unreasonable delay experienced.
Litigation against the DHA has never been as frequent as over the past couple of years, at a hefty cost for both the applicants and South African taxpayers.
Schreiber has centred his role as minister on the pursuit of the restoration of dignity. However, signing off irrational and erroneous rejection notices serves no such purpose and only allows the DHA to numerically account for progress on the backlog as an achievement. Looming ahead will be another backlog, predominantly consisting of appeals, which will defeat any progress made in 2024.
Bearing the brunt remain the applicants, trapped in a timeless state of uncertainty and deprivation, having entered South Africa as if in Dante’s Inferno: “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here”
