Although South Africa has one of the most progressive asylum laws and exceptional refugee protection frameworks in the world, the disunion between law and practice has allowed the blatant disregard of the law to thrive. The safety and security of the refugees who come to South Africa in the hopes of escaping the injustices of their homeland is internationally regulated by The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR, 1948”) which is the foundation of international human rights, and, more directly, by the 1951 Refugee Convention (1951 convention) and its 1967 Protocol.

In South Africa, The Refugee Act 130 of 1998 (“The Refugee Act”) was enacted to give effect to the 1951 convention, while some rights enshrined in our Bill of Rights, such as the right to equality, human dignity and just administrative action are afforded to all persons within South Africa

Applying for Asylum

When refugees legally cross the border, they must seek asylum from Department of Home Affairs (DOH) officials at the border who will then issue them with an asylum transit visa that will allow them 14 days to report to the Refugee Reception Office (RRO). If a refugee enters the country illegally, they must immediately report to the RRO. Once at the RRO, the first step is for the refugee to apply for an asylum seeker permit (section 22 permit) which requires that the refugee applicant (“the applicant”) must fill in the application form and be interviewed by the refugee reception officer before having their biodata and photos captured. Once this is done, the applicant will be issued with a section 22 permit (Asylum Seeker Temporary Visa) which is valid for six months.

Before the section 22 permit expires, the refugee is expected to return to the RRO for a second interview with the Refugee Status Determination Officer (RSDO). After this interview the RSDO must issue a written decision to either grant the applicant refugee status or reject the application as unfounded or manifestly unfounded, abusive or fraudulent.

The RSDO Rejection

The RSDO is obligated to provide the applicant with a written decision that sets out the reasons for rejecting the application. If the application is rejected as “unfounded” (section 24(3)(c) of The Refugee Act) it may be because the applicant’s reason for leaving their country is in line with the Refugee Act and therefore affording them refugee status, but the RSDO needs further motivation. In such a case the applicant is afforded an opportunity to appeal the decision within 30 days. If the application is rejected as “manifestly unfounded, abusive or fraudulent” (Section 24(3) (b) of The Refugee Act) it may be because the refugee mentioned a reason for applying for asylum that is not recognised in The Refugee Act. This rejection is automatically referred to the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs (SCRA) within 10 working days to either confirm, set aside or refer it back to the RSDO for reassessment. Additionally, if the applicant’s application is rejected as manifestly unfounded, the applicant is entitled to be furnished with written reasons within 5 working days from date of rejection by the RSDO or referral to the SCRA.

The “manifestly unfounded” procedural flaw

It is a common occurrence that applicants are not fully informed, if at all, about the asylum application procedure. They are unaware of the fact that even after the RSDO has formally rejected their application on the basis that it was manifestly unfounded, the RSDO is obligated to renew the applicant’s temporary asylum seeker permit until the SCRA has reviewed the decision.

In some recent cases, clients have come into the refugee clinic at ProBono.Org seeking assistance after being furnished with a letter from both the RSDO and the SCRA that informs the clients of their decision to reject their application on the basis that it was manifestly unfounded. The letter does not set out the reasons for that decision and further expresses an expectation for the applicant to appear within 14 days for the purpose of deportation because they are now considered to be staying in the country illegally. The RRO does this with a blatant disregard of the fact that it has taken the SCRA years to review the decision by the RSDO and in some cases that the RSDO do not even furnish the applicants with the said decision and reasons before furnishing them with a letter for their deportation. They fail to consider that due to their delay, most of the applicants have already started building a life for themselves in the country with them securing jobs and their children having have started school. Furthermore, the RSDO and the SCRA neglect to inform the applicants of their right to apply to the High Court for a judicial review within 180 days after the date that they received such a rejection.

Conclusion

A refugee, like any citizen of South Africa, is acknowledged by the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights. This therefore creates an expectation and an obligation on the Department of Home Affairs to ensure a procedural and substantial fairness in how they process each asylum application. This entails providing the applicant with the necessary information so that they can follow all the laws and rules that regulate their application and their stay in South Africa. Every applicant has a right to be furnished with the reasons why their application was rejected, to have the decision made by the RSDO over their application sent to the SCRA for review within 10 working days and the right to apply to the High Court within 180 days for a judicial review of their manifestly unfounded rejection on their application for refugee status..

Asylum Seekers & Refugees Good News !! 

If you have been in South Africa for 10 years as a Refugee did you know there is a path to permanent residence . 

Apply Now for Temporary Residence even with EXPIRED LOCKDOWN PERMITS 

The Constitutional Court handed down a judgement in the Ahmed matter as well as a Court Order opening the door for Asylum Seekers and Refugees to apply to change their status to  temporary residence visa . Contact us now before this fantastic opportunity is lost .

Contact us now and ask me HOW CHANGE TO TEMPORARY RESIDENCE . Travel abroad from South Africa , get a Canada , Schengen Visa afterwards .

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

A wave of ribbon-cutting ceremonies is sweeping the Saudi capital as multinationals face a January deadline to open regional headquarters in the Gulf kingdom or lose out on government contracts.

In what has become a common scene, executives in suits and Saudi officials in white robes gather to inaugurate the new offices, sipping Arabic coffee in a haze of incense smoke while singing the praises of last year`s fastest-growing G20 economy.

Announced in February 2021, Saudi Arabia`s regional headquarters (RHQ) programme is widely seen as a bid to compete with Dubai in the neighbouring United Arab Emirates, a favourite base for global firms with business in the Middle East. 

Despite complaints from some executives that there remains a lack of clarity on key details of the Saudi programme, the January 1 deadline is holding, the Saudi investment ministry told AFP in a written response to questions. 

`Multinational companies that are part of the RHQ Program will be well positioned to bid for projects funded by the Saudi Government,` it said. 

`Only multinational companies with regional headquarters in the Kingdom will be eligible for tenders and contracts floated by government entities.` 

So far, 162 regional headquarters licenses have been granted in sectors including pharmaceuticals, IT and construction, `with many others being processed`, the ministry said. 

The big question, analysts say, is whether participating firms are merely ticking a box to retain access to Saudi funds or genuinely embracing the government`s vision of Saudi Arabia as the centre of the region. 

The programme is `an early litmus test of the degree to which foreign businesses are prepared or willing to comply with and buy into Saudi initiatives, or whether they will seek workarounds that see them retain the majority of staff in the UAE and delegate a select few to Saudi,` said Kristian Ulrichsen, a fellow at Rice University`s Baker Institute. 

It should also offer clues about the implementation of flagship projects such as a new airline and airport, and the $500 billion (about R9.2 trillion), futuristic mega-city known as NEOM, Ulrichsen said.

`Jumping through hurdles` 

Riyadh defines a regional headquarters as an office that provides `strategic direction, management, and support services for company subsidiaries, branches, and affiliates in the (Middle East and North Africa) region`, the investment ministry said. 

One firm, IHG Hotels & Resorts, placed its new office on the 12th floor of a skyscraper in the capital`s financial district, staffing it with 25 employees from departments including revenue management, sales, marketing, design and engineering.

IHG has been present in Saudi Arabia for nearly 50 years, actively bids for government projects including developments along the Red Sea Coast and plans to open 20 hotels across the kingdom in 2024 and 2025, Haitham Mattar, managing director for the Middle East and Southwest Asia, said during the office`s ribbon-cutting ceremony in October.

But the company also has offices in Dubai and elsewhere in the region, and `we will continue with those offices`, Mattar told AFP. 

As for the process of establishing a Saudi regional headquarters, he acknowledged there were some kinks to work out. 

`It took us a bit of time and jumping through hurdles to achieve our licence for this office. However we are there now which is great and that`s what we`re happy and positive about,` he said. 

`This is all new to Saudi Arabia, right? So we have to really be conscious of that. There`s a lot of trial-and-error, there`s a lot of perfecting some of the processes, and sometimes some of the processes have maybe one too many steps.` 

`Ambitious` targets

The investment ministry has touted benefits for firms setting up regional headquarters in Saudi Arabia, including the ability to apply for unlimited work visas and a 10-year waiver on quotas for hiring Saudi nationals.

But it has not specified what kind of tax relief the firms might receive, a major question for executives. 

Laurent Germain, CEO of French construction engineering firm Egis Group, nevertheless told AFP he had no regrets about establishing a regional headquarters in Saudi Arabia last year, and that he advised other French firms to do the same. 

`We`ve come into a situation where now it is in Saudi Arabia that we have the most activities in the Middle East, and probably so for the next 10 years. It was a natural step,` he said. 

Germain added that he did not necessarily see the regional headquarters programme in the context of a budding Riyadh-Dubai rivalry, but rather as a broader bid to hit `very ambitious` foreign investment objectives.

`They are taking all the measures they can to increase the attractivenes

The reasons for the delays are causing people many problems 

Relative visas (any category) and Sec 11(6) my experience is that DHA taking anything from 18-24 months to process these applications. 

The delay is creating the following challenges to people :

- with Sec 11(6) employers do not want foreigner to commence work without valid visas and cannot wait so long. Often this results in offer / contract revoked. This delay therefore affects SA companies as well. 

The concession in many cases does not help for the above affected foreigner as some are on relative visas who have changed to sec 11(6) as they started a new job / some are on a Sec 11(6) which has company A’s details on bit moved to company B hence the new sec 11(6) visa was submitted. The current concession only extends the current expired visa which is of no use then to these foreigners and their new / prospective employers.  

- some sec 11(6) holders working for same employer cannot travel for business purposes as they are from visa NON exempt countries so cannot come back as they are not always traveling to their country of origin when traveling for business. 

- in general the sec 11(6) and relative delay is also taking away the opportunity for many to apply for PR as they have to wait for the outcome of temporary residence . 

- passports that were valid for 12-24 months expire while waiting and then rejections are issued. This waited over a year just to have it put back into the system and flooding the appeal section.

- Home Affairs have referred all Spouse / Life partners temporary residence visas to Department of Labour and DTI to check on work if a South African can do the job and business to DTI to see if person invested R5 million which is in contradiction to 3 Constitutional Court rulings that says this test is not required  and DTI and labour don’t have the manpower to action which means it will be stuck for a long time unresolved . 

What are my options?

Most of our clients after 6 months or so want to go to court and we can do that . In PTA for example the unopposed motion (other applications) roll is packed. The dates we currently get is in April 2024, ie 6 months from now .  The court order gives the DHA 10 days then to attend and finalise application and gives a punitive cost order. 

DHA have a tendency to finalise the application either just after the court order is served or just ( within  a month or a few days before the court date). 

So if we go legal route based on the above it is 8-12 months from date of court submission processes to outcome. And that is because of the court application or court order having been served on them.

What will it cost me . We have fixed fees so do not charge per hour or per copy, message etc. like our specialist legal  attorney firms work . 

How can we help you , please email us to info@samigration.com whatsapp message 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 Visas

https://g.page/SAMigration?gm

Alternatively , please contact us on :

 Whatsapp  Tel No : +27 (0) 82 373 8415 - ( Whatsapp messages only, No calls )

Tel No office : +27 (0) 82 373 8415 ( Whatsapp messages only, No calls ) 

Tel No landline CT  :  +27 (0) 21 879 5560

Tel No landline JHB : +27 (0) 12 880 1490 

Tel No admin : +27 (0) 64 126 3073 ( Whatsapp calls only  No Messages ) 

Tel No sales : +27 (0) 74 0366127 - ( Whatsapp calls only  No Messages )

www.samigration.com

Migration may be an increasingly contentious issue in South Africa, but that does not justify taking an axe to refugee rights and chipping away at the country’s commitments under the United Nations’ 1951 Refugee Convention, as the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) recently proposed alongside other immigration reforms.

Frustrations have risen across the board. Scapegoating of foreigners by officials has pushed many South Africans to blame migrants for their economic woes. Migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers suffer from xenophobic attacks and a backlogged asylum system. Home Affairs minister Dr. Aaron Motsoaledi characterized current migration legislation as “unworkable,” citing some contradictions between existing laws.

Among the DHA’s proposals are that South Africa withdraw from the Refugee Convention and reaccede to it with reservations, cherry-picking which rights to respect. However, the need for immigration reforms does not give the government carte blanche to toss away its human rights commitments.

At a November 12 press conference, Motsoaledi claimed South Africa “does not have the resources to grant the socio-economic rights envisaged in the 1951 Convention.” Refugee rights to education and work are likely ones the DHA would put on the chopping block.

This would be a damaging backslide on South Africa’s commitments. In 2018, South Africa endorsed the Global Compact on Refugees, which builds on the Comprehensive Refugee Response Framework. These instruments recognize the importance of refugee integration and inclusion, highlighting that access to education and labor markets promotes refugee self-reliance and contributes to local economies.

DHA is also proposing a “safe first country” rule that could deny asylum to people who transited through other countries en route to South Africa. However, without measures to guarantee impacted asylum seekers would be safe in those countries or have access to effective protection, such a rule would risk sending people to chain deportations and other harms, in violation of international law. For example, Greek authorities have sent back asylum seekers that transited Turkey, claiming it was “safe,” yet refugees and asylum seekers there suffered grave abuses and even deportation to Afghanistan, Syria, and other refugee-producing countries.

South Africa’s constitution proudly proclaims that it was founded on the values of human dignity and that “South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity.” Officials should keep these values in mind ahead of the country’s 2024 elections and ensure immigration reforms protect, not undermine, refugee rights.