Accurate information about the population is vital for the public and private sectors to be able to make effective decisions and implement policies properly, the writer says. Picture: 123RF
US President Donald Trump recently stated that many centenarians, allegedly aged from 100 up to 360, have been receiving social security benefit payments in the US. Though these have been revealed to be inaccurate and inflated numbers, evidence of any such payments over an extended period would be symptomatic of a defective population register.

Government efficiency can easily be undermined by a flawed population register. Accurate information about the population is vital for the public and private sectors to be able to make effective decisions and implement policies properly. Perfecting record collection, promoting and facilitating population interaction with those records and purging errors is rightfully a goal of any functioning democracy, but for some — including SA — implementation remains an ambition that faces many practical challenges.

In its early stages of implementation (1950s-1990s) the SA population register was underpinned by racial panopticism, and today it remains encumbered by bureaucratic mismanagement and incompetence, fraud and the phenomenon of citizenry dissociation. The National Population Register thus remains highly inaccurate. The ripple effect of this, with a national census with an undercount believed to be 30% or more, should be cause of great concern.

Under the auspices of the Identification Act of 1997 a more efficient management of the register was meant to be promoted and followed. Biometric smart-IDs are the latest, alas decade long, attempt to get things right once and for all. Though home affairs minister Leon Schreiber initially confirmed his department’s goal of phasing out green ID books by 2025, the challenges faced in achieving full implementation are magnified by the past mismanagement of the population register, which remains dogged by a history of fraud, “clerical errors” and missing records.

Plenty has already been said about the underlying issue of fraud. Only last year 700,000 IDs were blocked by the department in its bid to clamp down on fraud. Two weeks ago it was reported that Anabela Rungo, mother of withdrawn Miss SA contestant Chidimma Adetshina, was being detained pending deportation.
For decades many SA citizens have dissociated themselves from the register and its purpose. About 100,000 children born in SA every year are not registered at birth. To this number one must add all foreign-born SA children who were not registered at birth over the years. Unsurprisingly, late registration of births, which the department of home affairs wanted to stop entirely in 2015, remains a necessity in the SA landscape.

Many South Africans who have married abroad have, over the years, failed to register their marriages in SA. This has led to a recent pattern of rejections of spousal visas and permanent residence applications, despite that in terms of the SA Immigration Act the definition of “marriage” includes “a marriage concluded in terms of the laws of a foreign country”.

The department has no way to know whether a citizen has married overseas, has had children, or has acquired another citizenship, unless the citizen stays proactively connected with the SA government. Citizenry dissociation is partly responsible for the impeachment of the population register.
There are also far too many cases of “clerical errors” (read “institutional incompetence”), which over time affect many individuals who are unaware of the error until their identity is suddenly purged. It’s not just about numbers — behind each of these compromised or missing records are real people, their lives and stories. Each breach or lacuna affects the life of an individual and can jeopardise an identity, with no redress. Here is one of their stories.

A tale of institutional incompetence
Zain (a pseudonym) was born in Cape Town in early 2015 of an SA permanent resident father, an accomplished global equity analyst and asset manager. His parents, both from Pakistan, registered Zain’s birth with home affairs and were issued a birth certificate. Home affairs officials told his parents that Zain had been born an SA citizen, and his SA birth certificate confirmed that Zain was registered in the National Population Register as an SA citizen against an identity number.

The issuance of the birth certificate was the first of no fewer than three shocking “clerical errors” perpetuated for a full decade by the department, due to incompetence and lack of legal training. In 2015, two years after the coming into effect of the SA Citizenship Amendment Act of 2010, home affairs officials were still oblivious to a fundamental change in the legislation. That is, effective January 1 2013, in terms of the amended act the child born in SA of a permanent resident parent was no longer born a citizen.
As his father’s profession entails frequent travel, an application for Zain’s first SA passport quickly followed the registration of his birth. The passport application gave the department a second opportunity to implement due checks and balances, yet this did not happen and Zain’s first SA passport was issued in 2015 when he was only four months old.

Pakistan only has dual nationality agreements with 22 countries, and SA is not among them. As SA passports have historically outranked Pakistani passports in terms of global mobility scores, faced with the option his parents easily and reasonably settled on SA citizenship and passport for Zain.
In 2017 Zain’s father’s work led the family to relocate to the United Arab Emirates and Zain travelled on his SA passport while living there. As children’s passports are valid for five years, in 2020 Zain’s passport was due for renewal. The SA embassy in the UAE forwarded the renewal application to home affairs in Pretoria and again it failed in its role of custodianship and issued a new passport to Zain.
Fast forward to today. Zain is now 10 and has already travelled to the UK, Turkey, Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand and Pakistan on his SA passport, and visa applications have been processed on that passport throughout. But recently, another passport renewal application was submitted via the embassy, and home affairs finally latched onto the error. An official from the embassy called Zain’s father and politely yet unapologetically informed him that Zain was not an SA citizen and he would therefore not be issued a new passport.

Zain has no redress against home affairs’ incompetence and his family is now left to face the many complications that will follow, with nothing more than a one-page letter issued by home affairs stating the conclusion. No accountability, no official explanation that can be shown to other governments with which Zain has interacted as an SA citizen.

Sadly, Zain’s story is far from unique. Many other children who were born in SA after January 1 2013 of at least one permanent resident parent, will be faced with the same stark realisation as their lives progress and their identities are suddenly purged. Unless Schreiber’s home affairs can rise above the issues of the past, some of these children will soon be writing matric, buying property, marrying and having children, all under an identity they were never entitled to in the first place.

The error could be endlessly perpetuated, creating yet more innocent victims of the institutional vandalism that has plagued the department for far too long...

How can we help you?
Please email us to info@samigration.com
Whatsapp message us on: +27 82 373 8415

Where are you now?
Check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm

The father, who has been embroiled in a protracted legal conflict with his former partner since July 2024, initiated an application to seek contact with his daughter.

In a significant ruling heralded as a victory for parental rights, a father seeking access to his seven-year-old daughter and to have his name on her birth certificate has succeeded in a landmark case at the South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg.
The father, who has been embroiled in a protracted legal conflict with his former partner since July 2024, initiated an application to seek contact with his daughter. The couple, who were never married, faced challenges reaching a settlement on their own, ultimately compelling the father to escalate the matter to the courts after the mother’s attorney asserted, he would not gain access without a formal court order.

In subsequent legal proceedings, tensions heightened when the mother failed to respond promptly, only submitting her affidavit just before the hearing was set to commence. Judge Seena Yacoob expressed concern over the lack of substantial evidence presented by the mother, particularly in light of the father’s documented claims and evidence supporting his application.

A core issue that emerged was the mother’s refusal to include the father's name on the child's birth certificate. She argued that this would impede her plans to relocate to Papua New Guinea for a lucrative job opportunity. However, Judge Yacoob highlighted the absence of factual support for this claim, which raised alarms about the potential implications of the mother taking the child abroad without the father’s consent.

Given that she possessed both a passport and a birth certificate solely in her name, Judge Yacoob ordered that the child's passport be surrendered to an independent attorney. This measure would prevent the mother from travelling internationally with the child without both parents' agreement.
Regarding the father's access to the child, the mother argued that the father already had contact, but it was noted that the father had to bring an application after he was told by the mother's attorney that he would not get contact without a court order. The judge said it would be in the interest of the child for there to be an order to avoid any change being made unilaterally.

In addressing the father's request for his name to be added to the birth certificate, Judge Yacoob elucidated that the law provided no valid justification to refuse this relief. The judge indicated that objections were largely driven by the mother’s logistical preferences rather than any substantiated legal rationale. Furthermore, it was determined that facilitating the father's inclusion on the birth certificate would serve the best interests of the child and reinforce the father’s role in her life.

Sustaining a balanced approach, the judge acknowledged the father's concerns about the current parenting coordinator, noting that while his apprehensions were justified, a comprehensive assessment would be necessary to avoid frivolous claims hampering crucial parental agreements.

How can we help you?
Please email us to info@samigration.com
Whatsapp message us on: +27 82 373 8415

Where are you now?
Check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm

Home affairs minister needs to make informed decisions surrounding complex topic of citizenship
The right to a nationality is enshrined in article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and recognised in many other international and regional human rights instruments.

Under international law depriving someone of their nationality is only permitted under narrow circumstances. In most countries and jurisdictions the minimum requirements are that there must be a legal basis, doing so must serve a legitimate purpose and the process must be proportionate, adequate and necessary.
In line with international standards, section 20 of the SA constitution states that “no citizen may be deprived of citizenship”, and the SA Citizenship Act provides the legislative framework within which to uphold this right, including the so-called “special circumstances” under which SA citizenship can be revoked by ministerial order, on the proviso that nobody may be rendered stateless by this action.

Section 8(2) of the act contemplates deprivation when the citizen is also a citizen of another country, if the home affairs minister is “satisfied that (a) such citizen has at any time been sentenced in any country to a period of imprisonment of not less than 12 months for any offence which, if it was committed outside the republic, would also have constituted an offence in the republic; or (b) that it is in the public interest.”

Painful injustice
On December 6, before wrapping up the year and his first semester as home affairs minister, among numerous upbeat media statements, social media posts and even celebratory dances lauding the progress made by his TeamHomeAffairs, the DA’s Leon Schreiber released a statement announcing the deportation of Janusz Walus, the Polish extremist who served a long prison sentence for assassinating Chris Hani.
News of the deportation sparked immediate controversy. For Hani’s widow, his family and all other parties that had for years fiercely opposed his release on parole, it was a painful injustice carried out in the name of the rule of law.

The ANC soon joined the outcry, opposing the deportation on the basis that it should have not been permitted without a full confession from Walus.  ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula said Walus owed South Africans an explanation as the party believed there was a wider conspiracy to murder Hani.
Schreiber clarified that Walus’s immediate deportation was due to his illegal immigration status and the conclusion of his two-year parole period, noting that “the department of home affairs comes in at the end of this particular process”. Striking a reasonable balance in the controversy, Schreiber described it as “a painful day for SA”, adding: “Probably the only thing worse than having him a free man in Poland is him being a free man illegally in SA”.
Crucial to this outcome was the revocation of Walus’s SA citizenship in 2017 by then ANC home affairs minister Malusi Gigaba, upon which Walus’s defence relied in arguing for his release on parole. It was evident, already at that time, that his treatment as an “alien” (as defined by the Citizenship Act) who was detained and serving a sentence in SA, might have a favourable effect on his judicial destiny.

The word “may” is the most significant word underpinning the empowering provisions that allow for the deprivation of citizenship. Discretion must be applied, striking a careful balance between contrasting interests and rights. Gigaba’s decision to revoke Walus’s citizenship was clearly not based only on the fact that it was lawful. By contrast, Schreiber was obliged by law to deport Walus. Ironically, had Walus remained a dual Polish and SA national there would have been no immediate obligation for Schreiber and his department to do so on the conclusion of his parole period.

It was Gigaba’s decision, which came 17 years after the commutation of the original death sentence and 24 years after the initial conviction, that should be seen as reckless in the eyes of those who are now aghast at Walus’s swift deportation — the ANC included.
Gigaba’s vexed discretion in the application of the legislative and statutory scheme surrounding citizenship has been subject to considerable subsequent investigation, including during the Zondo state capture inquiry. However, in this context the cautionary tale for Schreiber is that when dealing with deprivation of citizenship what is lawful is not always what is just.

Concurrently with these events, Schreiber has been dealing with other well-known cases concerning the revocation of SA citizenship, and of identity custodianship with opposing interests, including the issues surrounding the Gupta family.
On November 24 the minister confirmed the revocation of Ajay Gupta’s son’s citizenship. There are also a myriad cases (many yet to be uncovered) of young people who have been registered as SA citizens at birth, either in error or by fraud and misrepresentation.
These individuals — former Miss SA contestant Chidimma Adetshina is a prominent example — may find themselves stripped of a citizenship they genuinely believed was their right, even though they played no role in obtaining it at birth or as minors.

Contrary to what has been reported, such cases have nothing to do with a deprivation of citizenship in terms of the Citizenship Act but are rather related to the rectification/erasure of the records in the National Population Register, in fulfilment of the department’s mandate of custodianship. This process leaves the individual no immediate recourse — their SA identity can be purged overnight without any direct wrongdoing.
Throughout the failed lengthy endeavours to extradite the Guptas from the United Arab Emirates wrangling over their deprivation of SA citizenship continued. This has since been disabled with the confirmation in May 2023 by the Vanuatu Citizenship Commission that Atul and Rajesh Gupta had acquired Vanuatu citizenship.

This was just weeks before the Supreme Court of Appeal handed down judgment on the constitutional invalidity of section 6(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act, which provides for the automatic loss of SA citizenship. In simple terms this is an automatic loss by uninformed omission of an action. On November 5 the Constitutional Court reserved its judgment on the issue, but in terms of the legislation as it stands the Gupta brothers already automatically ceased to be SA citizens in 2023.

To avoid becoming another cautionary tale to future generations, Schreiber will have to exercise the necessary caution and make informed decisions surrounding the complex and delicate topic of citizenship. He certainly has his work cut out for him.

How can we help you?
Please email us to info@samigration.com
Whatsapp message us on: +27 82 373 8415

Where are you now?
Check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm

Minister of Home Affairs Leon Schreiber says he is undeterred by tensions within the government of national unity.
• Minister Leon Schreiber says he won't stop working at the home affairs department "until someone drags me out of the building".
• The proposed fiscal framework, including the VAT hike, was passed with support from parties outside of the GNU, leading to the national working committee of the ANC saying it would "reset" its position with GNU partners.
• He made the comments amid tensions between the government of national unity (GNU) and the DA, opposing a 0.5% VAT hike proposed by the ANC.

Minister of Home Affairs Leon Schreiber says he is undeterred by tensions within the government of national unity (GNU) and uncertainty over his Cabinet position, saying: "I'm not stopping until someone drags me kicking and screaming."
He was speaking during the unveiling of new border control technology in Tshwane on Thursday, adding that he remains "focused on the job".
Schreiber said he has to continue doing his work to the best of his ability while still in the position.
"We will keep working until someone drags us out of the building."
Deputy President Paul Mashatile told an Ahmed Kathrada Legacy Business Breakfast on Monday that he would be ashamed to report for duty to implement a Budget he did not support. This was in reference to DA ministers who continued to show up for work despite voting against the fiscal framework and revenue proposals last Wednesday.

Tensions surrounding the GNU have been rife in recent weeks, with News24 reporting an impasse regarding Cabinet positions and an indefinite postponement of the fortnightly Cabinet meeting, though the official reason cited was "scheduling issues".
The DA, which Schreiber belongs to, remained steadfast in its decision to oppose the proposed fiscal framework, threatening its position in the GNU.
On Monday, the ANC's national working committee resolved to "reset" the rule of engagement in the GNU after the DA voted against the fiscal framework.
Finance Minister Enoch Godogwana's proposed 0.5 percentage-point VAT hike was passed with the help of parties outside of the GNU, most notably ActionSA.

Border Management
On Thursday, the Border Management Authority (BMA) and Schreiber unveiled 40 new GPS-enabled body cameras with live-streaming capabilities and four surveillance drones to enhance border monitoring.
With only 2 600 frontline officers and 40 office-bound workers, BMA commissioner Michael Masiapato says that "most of everything is automated".
Since taking office, Schreiber has been working to digitise and automate many of the decisions at the border posts, intending to "close off the discretion" that encourages officials to exploit borders and home affairs.

President Cyril Ramaphosa endorsed Schreiber during his State of the Nation Address in February, commending how the minister had resolved 300 000 visa applications and cleared 90% of the visa backlog at the Department of Home Affairs, using what Schreiber dubbed the "backlog bomb squad".
Schreiber took charge of the struggling portfolio from Aaron Motsoaledi, who created the BMA as South Africa's border law enforcement agency under the Border Management Authority Act in 2023.
Crippled by years of corruption, Schreiber inherited a department that was plagued with inefficiency and capacity issues.
Significant funding challenges still hinder the nascent BMA, which reached its second anniversary in April, from fulfilling its mandate of securing South Africa's borders. Masiapato said BMA requested R9 billion, which the State could not provide in preparation for BMA's establishment.
Receiving only R250 million from the State, Masiapato said BMA used an additional R150 million it received from the Criminal Assets Recovery Account to purchase the new technology.


Adverse weather often affects ports of entry across the country. In February, BMA had to suspend operations at three ports between South Africa and Botswana due to heavy rainfalls that raised the Molopo River's water levels.
In response to border infrastructure questions, Schreiber announced that "six of the busiest land ports in the country" will be reconstructed, but that an official announcement was coming the following weeks.
He said that while BMA is considering redeveloping some of the ports, it may be challenging for ports that are unexpectedly affected by environmental conditions.
"BMA is looking. You actually may have to move some of [the damaged ports]. If it's part of an existing plan to redevelop, then it may not be hard [but] it may be harder if there is no plan," said Schreiber.

How can we help you?
Please email us to info@samigration.com
Whatsapp message us on: +27 82 373 8415

Where are you now?
Check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm

The Department of Home Affairs has dismissed 33 officials since July in a major anti-corruption drive, with more prosecutions underway.
The total number of Department of Home Affairs (DHA) officials dismissed for various acts of fraud and corruption since July 2024 has risen to 33.
On Tuesday, the department dismissed six more officials immediately for various offences, including fraud and corruption. Six more officials were also issued final written warnings.

Six Home Affairs officials dismissed on Tuesday
An additional eight officials have already been convicted and sentenced to prison terms ranging from four to 18 years, while prosecution of another 19 officials is underway.
In one notable case, a Pakistani national, Afran Ahmed, was sentenced to 18 years imprisonment in the Krugersdorp Magistrate Court, Gauteng. Ahmed charged foreign nationals R45 000 per South African passport.

The department spokesperson, Siya Qoza, said Tuesday’s dismissals come after the recent launch of the Border Management and Immigration Anti-Corruption Forum.
The forum has strengthened coordination between the department, the Border Management Authority (BMA), the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), and the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA).

“The speed at which Home Affairs, in collaboration with the SIU, is clearing out corruption from our midst demonstrates that swift progress can be made in the fight against this scourge,” Minister of Home Affairs Leon Schreiber said.
Schreiber added that he has made it clear to the department that delays will not be tolerated and that DHA will not rest until every corrupt official is fired.

‘Delays will not be tolerated’ – Minister Schreiber
“I applaud the inter-departmental teams for their progress in ensuring that we wash the stain of corruption and state capture off of Home Affairs so that it becomes the proud institution our country deserves,” Schreiber said.
“My message to remaining perpetrators is clear: it is only a matter of time before we catch you and hold you accountable.”

How can we help you?
Please email us to info@samigration.com
Whatsapp message us on: +27 82 373 8415

Where are you now?
Check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm