OPINION | Daniel Malan: Imagine there's no countries; it is very hard to do (Apologies John Lennon)

 

News24 -7 May 2022

Somewhere in the late 1980s, I tried to travel from Durban to Cape Town through the Transkei after a student conference.

I knew at the time that – even though the South African government acknowledged the "homelands" as independent countries, one could easily travel through them without a passport, as long as you had your South African ID document with you.

On this occasion, though, I had left my ID document at home. I decided to combine an appetite for risk with naïve political acumen, and thus attempted an unauthorised international trip within my own country.

As a white male, I knew the risk would be minimal when stopped at the border post. In my most eloquent politically inspired narrative, I tried to explain to the immigration official (a fellow Afrikaans speaking South African white male) that we all knew this was a sham in the eyes of the international community, and could he please just let me through.

"Sir", he explained with indignation, "if you want to cross this border, it is the same as if you were travelling to Japan!"

Different types of borders 

A 24-hour detour later, having travelled through another former independent country called the Orange Free State, I arrived back home.

My argument with the immigration official stuck with me, and I have been thinking about it recently while trying to make sense of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Similar to the absurd situation of Bantustan banter with a clueless Homeland Affairs official, I tried to imagine Russian tanks being stopped at the Ukrainian border with requests for visas and international driving permits. Of course, this time, the international border is real, but a military tank has more persuasive power than a rental car filled with undergraduate students.

This is where my ignorance in terms of global politics becomes apparent, but I started to think in very general terms about different types of borders and how they might or might not seem arbitrary to some, depending on the context. The United States of America. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The European Union. And of course, the former Union of Socialist Soviet Republics.

As a South African citizen now working in Ireland, I live in the European Union. If I want to travel to Belfast in Northern Ireland, I need a United Kingdom visa, even though there is no border control on the Island of Ireland. I need one visa for the United States but can then travel between the 50 "united" states as I please, regardless of whether they belonged to the Union or the Confederacy. I only need one visa for most Western European countries, named after a village in Luxembourg (Schengen) where the intergovernmental agreement to abandon cross-border checks was signed in 1985.

How does my experience at an illegitimate border post in South Africa more than 30 years ago influence my views on the war in Ukraine? I am not sure.

Humans draw borders, and they need the support of humans to be maintained.

'What do people want?'

We know that some of these borders are arbitrary – consider the straight line between Namibia and Botswana (although the international dispute has been about the Caprivi strip and related to the more complex geographical issue of rivers and islands), not to mention the borders hastily drawn with the help of a ruler (the measuring tool, not a political leader) that have had a long-term impact on the political situation in the Middle East.

The people drawing the borders are usually not the ones required to respect them. The default democratic position is always to ask: "What do the people want?". We know this question is fraught with complexity. What if the people want capital punishment? What if the people want a racist as president? What if the people want to join another country, union or kingdom? Think about Flanders and Wallonia, Quebec and Basque country, to mention a few.

Going back quite a few years in South African history, we used to have a South African Republic (Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek, coincidentally ZAR is still the abbreviation for the South African currency) and the already mentioned Republic of the Orange Free State (Oranje Vrijstaat). These republics were acknowledged in the 19th century by the international community, including by what was then called the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (now Great Britain and Northern Ireland).

Today the dream of a whites-only "boer" republic is restricted to Orania, a town that tries to maintain a whites-only apartheid community by evoking the human rights that could only be guaranteed by the political defeat of those they admire. The Orania website still celebrates the fact that the wife of Hendrik Verwoerd decided to call Orania home.

'My land was born'

My own background is not in political science, and I, therefore, have no qualms to conclude with three musical references.

It was during the 1980s that I saw a performance of the musical Chess for the first time. It was in London during my first backpack trip to Europe. I am sure many readers will have memories of Luxavia airline, spartan youth hostels and Eurail tickets. With music by ABBA members Benny Andersson and Björn Ulvaeus, the Cold War plot of Chess evoked different dimensions of manipulation involving an American and Soviet chess master, with catchy tunes like "One Night in Bangkok" and "I Know Him So Well". But it was in the lesser known "Anthem" that the complexities of belonging and nationalism were displayed:

"Long before nations' lines were drawn

When no flags flew, when no armies stood

My land was born …

Let man's petty nations tear themselves apart

My land's only borders lie around my heart"

A few weeks ago, I visited Paris (courtesy of my Schengen visa) and attended a piano recital by Valentina Lisitsa, a Ukrainian-Russian pianist residing in the United States.

Lisitsa is a controversial figure – a few years ago, one of her concerts was cancelled in Canada because of pro-Russian tweets following the annexation of Crimea.

This time she was more circumspect and issued a statement that was printed in the official programme: 

It is hard to think of anything more painful and horrific than war. Being born in Ukraine and having spent most of my adult life in the US, this tragedy is very personal to me, as I have family and friends in Russia and Ukraine. I believe that any war is against human reason and human nature, especially when this war is between neighbours.

I do not have any family or friends in either Russian or Ukraine, and my experience of the war in Ukraine is therefore not personal. Although it is romantically tempting, I do not believe that the borders of a country only lie around our hearts. Although the lines might sometimes be blurred, borders play a role in defining who we are, even in a globalised world. So when John Lennon sings "imagine there’s no countries, it isn’t hard to do", I have to disagree. 

www.samigration.com

Is citizenship a right or a privilege?

The House – 07 May 2022

Stripping someone of their British citizenship is contentious, so a new clause allowing the government to revoke it without notice has reinvigorated the debate on how the Home Office views citizenship. Analysis by Laura Hutchinson of Dods Political Intelligence

Before the government stripped London-born Shamima Begum of her British citizenship in 2019 for joining Islamic State in Syria, many were unaware the home secretary had such powers at their disposal. 

In fact, aspects of this authority have existed in some form since 1914. New powers included in the nationality and borders legislation have brought the subject back under parliamentary scrutiny, with concerns raised about the impact this practice could have on ethnic minorities.  

Human rights groups insist the new powers will disproportionally impact non-white Britons

Clause nine specifies new powers to allow a home secretary to remove citizenship without prior notification. Previously the government had to notify individuals of its intention, thereby allowing ample time to appeal. 

The Home Office argues this change is purely administrative and the powers are vital for national security. Human rights groups insist the new powers will disproportionally impact non-white Britons, and could punish individuals who have been groomed, trafficked, or coerced into criminal activity.

The Institute of Race Relations (IRR) argues the powers are “draconian” and could lead to unequal treatment for British-born citizens with dual nationality, or sole nationals who acquire another nationality. 

Frances Webber, vice-chair of the IRR, tells The House the no-notice revocation clause “builds on discriminatory citizenship-stripping measures” and reminds dual nationals – mostly ethnic minorities – that “even if born here, they are not citizens by right, only by withdrawable privilege”.
The Home Office stresses it restricts the option of removing British citizenship to those who have obtained it by fraud or pose a threat to the UK, and failing to inform people their citizenship is being revoked will occur only in exceptional circumstances.

“That is not a policy change; the grounds on which that decision can be taken and the statutory right of appeal from it remain unchanged,” former justice minister Lord Wolfson of Tredegar told Parliament. 

Regardless, the change has reinvigorated the debate on how the Home Office views citizenship. 
Speaking to The House, the Muslim Council of Britain says the new powers threaten Britain’s historic tradition of being a welcoming place, arguing the legislation presents an “affront to human rights that will have devastating consequences on a cross-section of our communities and wider society”.

“Nationality and citizenship are not a privilege but a human right. They cannot be removed, as this allows for, by the government and without question or appeal,” a spokesperson adds. 

The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has a right to a nationality, but the government is clear the new powers, and its use of citizenship-stripping more widely, are consistent with international obligations. 

Regardless, human rights groups argue the Home Office already has the broadest powers to strip citizenship of any G20 nation, and in recent years has deprived more people than any country in the world, with the exception of Bahrain.

Speaking to The House, Reprieve argues the government is moving in the wrong direction with these new powers.

“Rather than seek to extend these vast executive powers still further, it should reflect on how it has come to be so out of step with its allies on this key issue,” a spokesperson tells The House. 

Responding to the criticism, a Home Office spokesperson says: “Our priority is to ensure the safety and security of the UK. Deprivation of citizenship is used against those who have acquired citizenship by fraud and against the most dangerous people, such as terrorists, extremists and serious organised criminals. 

“Deprivation of citizenship only happens after very careful consideration of the facts and in accordance with international law. Each case is assessed individually on its own merits and always comes with the right of appeal.”

www.samigration.com

Stellenbosch waiting game — Is this among the worst Home Affairs offices in South Africa?

07 May 2022 – Daily Maverick

 

In a relatively well-run town like Stellenbosch in the Western Cape, its Home Affairs is close to collapse, reportedly operating with a staff capacity of less than 15%. The office shares consistent problems with other Home Affairs offices across the country.

It is 11.16 am and exhaustion hangs in the air. Many people have been in the line that snakes around the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office for almost four hours.

Those sitting at the front arrived at 7am, but haven’t moved an inch since the doors opened an hour and a half later. Being at the front of this line doesn’t offer anyone hope. There are no indications that the end is in sight. 

There are almost 20 people inside the office. But “who knows what time they came,” a woman, who asked to be known as LJ, says while standing in the ID and passport queue. “Everyone’s time is worth more than standing in a Home Affairs line, no matter what you have to do.”

According to the auditor-general report 2020/21, Stellenbosch is one of the better-run towns in the country, but it is not spared from the problems at its Home Affairs offices experienced across the country

A series of questions to Home Affairs Minister Dr Aaron Motsoaledi on 25 February, from Democratic Alliance (DA) constituency head for Stellenbosch Municipality Leon Schreiber, led the minister to admit that the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office is close to outright collapse. 

Two major issues, among other problems, cripple this particular office: it is heavily understaffed and the building and surroundings where people must stand to queue are unkept and a health hazard. 

Staff shortages are part of a nationwide problem, with Motsoaledi replying to queries in March this year that shortages are a result of continuous budget cuts from the National Treasury.

The department requested an additional R266-million for employment compensation from the Treasury to fill 762 vacant posts (427 for civic services, 328 for immigration services and seven for information services), according to its annual performance presentation plan on 26 April.

According to the Department of Home Affairs’ Annual Report 2020/2021, staff shortages were one of the fundamental and unsolved issues it faced in strategically managing long queues. Shortages were also flagged for hampering service delivery in the department’s annual report 2008/2009.

A pipe has been leaking from the bathroom at the Home Affairs office for months. Something is yet to be done about this health hazard. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

At the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office, people must stand amid a growing stench that comes from a leaking bathroom pipe just a few feet from the queue. Cigarette butts, dirt, and even an old nappy litter the area. 

No chairs are provided for people as they wait. They have to sit in an area littered with dirt. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

Some of the unprepared must sit on this ground because there are no chairs provided.

But by the looks of it, most of the 40 or so people who stand outside have not walked into this blind. People sit on camping chairs brought from home, some with laptops out for work while others are attending their lectures online. Some have taken the day off and brought a book with them to pass the time — any attempt to make this stakeout comfortable. 

Others gawk around, suffering absolute boredom — a waste of a day. People question why the hassle, apart from biometrics, cannot be done online in 2022.

A spirited joke makes its way around the queue: “If only they had put out a food stand here, they would make a lot more money! They may as well have made it lekker”. 

Defeated laughter goes around in response because everyone here knows they will be stuck in this line for the day. Some might need to come back tomorrow too. 

Near collapse 

According to Schreiber, the office should have 41 officials working at the office to tend to the needs of the community. 

“The office currently only has six staff members, meaning that it is operating at only 14% of its capacity,” said Schreiber. On two visits to the office, Daily Maverick saw only four officials at work. 

An admin clerk working at the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office, who asked not to be named to protect her job, told Daily Maverick that, “there are only four of us here a day and when two of us are sick, then it is chaotic and impossible”. 

According to Schreiber, the DA will “shortly launch a formal petition to Parliament calling for the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office to be fully capacitated”.

“[Once submitted, it] will force the Department of Home Affairs to appear before Parliament and account for the way in which they have let down the people of Stellenbosch,” Schreiber says. 

According to Leslie Williams, manager at the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office, between 300 and 400 people queue there daily. “It differs,” he says. The office — only 406 square metres in area, is also four times too small to properly serve the community.  

“I don’t even think they get to 100 people — no way they service so many —  never,” says Cecile Pienaar, standing in the queue since 8:15 am.  

Some people are so frustrated that they are willing to step in to alleviate the pressure.

“If they are really so understaffed, open up doors for employment… I’ll even step in and work here — I’ll do it now,” said Abbalisha Pearce. 

Pearce’s husband, Brendon Pearce, adds, “what happens now at 3:30 [pm] when the office closes? They are going to go home even if we are still standing here. They aren’t going to stay here.”

A few people have strategically come to this office, avoiding the Paarl and Bellville offices, only to find that similar issues prevail. 

By 11am, a notice had gone up that the office had reached full capacity. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

At around 11am, a sign goes up near the end of the line, stating that the office has reached full capacity. Anyone coming later than 11am would need to come back another day. 

For a substantial period between 8.30 am, when the office opens, and midday, the system is offline.

“Not one official came out to inform us [at the back] what is happening, it would be hugely helpful if they did,” said a man, who asked to be referred to only as Marius, standing in the queue with his daughter, who should be in school. 

Someone in the line had to go into the office to ask what was happening to find out that the system was offline. 

Only the people at the front of the queue were told when they arrived that the system was offline.

“There was hope, and then I was quickly disappointed,” said Jesse Jones, who had been in line for his passport since 7am. 

Jesse Jones came from Woodstock to the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office. He arrived at 7am, but still wasn’t inside the office by noon. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

According to the admin clerk at the office, this is the norm. It takes about 15 minutes to open a document on the system.

What’s new?

When people in line eventually hear that the system is offline, no one moves. “That shows you that people are used to the system not working, but they have invested this time now to come here,” said a woman who didn’t want to be named. 

After 12pm, cheers are heard from the queue. The system has come back online; someone has checked on their phone. 

According to Ceinwen Smith, standing in the queue “hopefully” for both her ID and passport, it seems as if the staff’s hands are tied. “They are not given agency to do anything. That just speaks to the whole system.”

This was especially true for the leaking pipe coming from the bathroom. According to the admin clerk, it has been leaking for months. 

“We have been complaining about this [to the Department of Home Affairs and Public Works] over and over again,” she said. Nothing has been done. When Daily Maverick asked, “why not call a plumber?”,  she shrugged. 

Most of the toilet handles at the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office are broken, leaving water to run continuously. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

Small problems that could easily be fixed, like toilets continually leaking water because handles are absent or broken, persist.

Additionally, none of the toilet doors at the office — excluding those that weren’t out of order — could be locked.

“You feel unsafe because the toilets are unisex,” Smith says. 

Nicola Pretorius, waiting to get her son’s passport, shares Smith’s disappointment. 

Nicola Pretorius says ‘surely we can work on a better system in 2022’. (Photo: Rebecca Pitt)

“There is no attempt to make this situation any better,” she says. Pretorius  is working as she waits, with her power bank at hand. 

“This is where we interact with our government,” Pretorius says. “If this is how they treat the people of South Africa, it doesn’t offer any hope.”

By 1.10pm, the queue outside hadn’t moved. The doors would close at 3.30pm.

The Stellenbosch Home Affairs office is under the custodianship of the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure. 

According to Thami Mchunu, spokesperson at the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure, the department is unaware of the infrastructure issues, including the leaking bathroom pipe, at the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office.  

“The department will, however, investigate and attend to the matter now that it has been brought under its attention,” Mchunu said. DM

The Department of Home Affairs had more than a week to respond to Daily Maverick’s queries, with five follow-up prompts, none of which yielded a result.

Leslie Williams, manager at the Stellenbosch Home Affairs office, declined to give an official comment, but said: “People inform us of the problems, and we are aware of it. We take it up to the next level — the ones we cannot deal with.

www.samigration.com

EXCLUSIVE | The Russian actress, the billionaire’s party and the bogus asylum claim

News 24 – 04 May 2022

 

• An actress living in London, who arrived in South Africa to attend a party hosted by a well-known South African businessman, was denied entry into the country.
• After being denied entry because she didn't have a valid visa, there was alleged political interference to persuade immigration officials to let her in.
• After alleged attempts to persuade officials didn't work, the actress then claimed to be an asylum seeker. 

A Russian-born actress living in London appears to have made a bogus asylum claim in order to get into the country to attend a party hosted by a South African billionaire, after alleged political interference to persuade immigration officials to let her in failed. 

On 28 April, a private charter flight landed at Cape Town International Airport. Ieva Andrejevaite was among the passengers which included a British billionaire, who owned the plane.  

The purpose of the visit was to attend a series of parties being hosted by the South African businessman.

This was confirmed by a source with intimate knowledge about the incident. The source said the passengers on the plane told immigration services that they were in the country for leisure and made it clear that they were going to attend a party being thrown by the well-known South African businessman. 

While the rest of the passengers were allowed to enter South Africa, Andrejevaite was stopped as she did not have a valid visa to enter the country. 

It is believed Andrejevaite was travelling using a Lithuanian passport, which meant that she required a visa to enter the country. 

The Department of Home Affairs confirmed to News24 that Andrejevaite arrived without a visa, which was detected by immigration officials. 

She was subsequently denied entry.

Interference 

Following the decision to bar Andrejevaite entering, it is understood that immigration officials dealing with the incident started receiving a number of phone calls to persuade them to deviate from the normal processes and help the actress find a way to enter the country. 

News24 further understands that there were also attempts by a minister's personal assistant to intervene.

However, the immigration officials did not buckle under the pressure and remained resolute that Andrejevaite would not be entering the country. 

Home affairs spokesperson Siya Qoza did not say whether immigration officials had been subjected to outside or political pressure but said, "We are happy that immigration officials stuck to the provisions of the law and never deviated from it."

He did not say whether the passengers on board the plane informed immigration as to the purpose of their visit.

Asylum

After attempts to have immigration officials change their decision, an attorney was appointed for Andrejevaite. The attorney told officials that the actress wanted to apply for asylum as she has ties to Ukraine. 

Qoza confirmed this and added that "... immigration officials told him that applicants needed to apply for asylum themselves. Nobody is allowed to apply for asylum on somebody else's behalf."

The source said that Andrejevaite proceeded to submit an asylum claim and was advised to report to a refugee reception centre to lodge her claim in person. Her passport was also confiscated. 

Qoza said that Andrejevaite was given an opportunity to apply for asylum and as a result, was allowed into the country. 

Qoza said:

She was subjected to the transit processes contained in the immigration laws for people who claim asylum at Ports of Entry. She was then given a Section 23 permit that allows her to be in the country for purposes of applying for asylum. A Section 23 permit gives the applicant five days, by law, to present themselves at any one of the five Refugee Reception Offices. These offices are in Musina, Pretoria, Cape Town, Gqeberha, and eThekwini.

The source said that although immigration officials believed the asylum claim was bogus, their hands were tied because legally, if an asylum claim is lodged, the person must be allowed to enter the country and state their case. 

The flight on which Andrejevaite arrived, departed from Cape Town International Airport on Sunday evening, however, she was not aboard.

Qoza has not confirmed whether Andrejevaite had since reported to a refugee reception centre, and if so, whether she had submitted a claim or cancelled it.

www.samigration.com

Live , Stay , Play , Work , Retire , Study , Conduct Business �` South Africa How can we help you , please email us to info@samigration.com whatsapp me 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 International https://g.page/SAMigration?gm Sa Migration https://g.page/Sami-HQ?we Alternatively , please contact us on : Sa Migration International Whatsapp Tel No : +27 (0) 82 373 8415 Tel No office : +27 (0) 82 373 8415 ( Whatsapp ) Tel No admin : +27 (0) 64 126 3073 Tel No sales : +27 (0) 74 0366127 Fax No : 086 579 0155 www.samigration.com