sami - Posthaven

Ongoing closure of reception offices leaves refugees and asylum seekers in undocumented limbo

Ongoing closure of reception offices leaves refugees and asylum seekers in undocumented limbo

Daily Maverick - 20 September 2021

South Africa is a signatory to international refugee treaties, treaties incorporated into its legal system through the Refugees Act. This gives refugees and asylum seekers protection under the Bill of Rights. But the ongoing closure of refugee reception offices means that many are in complete limbo.

Since the declaration of the national state of disaster, which was followed by the national lockdown, all public and private offices and institutions were closed down, except the ones that provide essential services.

Offices of the Department of Home Affairs were among those that were closed and its services were limited to ensuring repatriations of South African citizens and permanent residents who were stranded abroad and to allow foreign nationals to depart the country. Closure of these offices meant that permits and visas couldn’t be issued or renewed. Under different levels of the lockdown, certain crucial civil and immigration services were, however, gradually re-opened.

Back in March 2020, the Department of Home Affairs issued a directive that all visas and permits that expired or were due to expire on, before, or after 25 March 2020 should be deemed valid. This blanket extension, which ran from 26 March to 31 July 2020, implied that all immigration visas and refugee (or asylum-seeker) permits that expired during the said period remained valid.

Still, the date of blanket extension was periodically extended. First, it was extended to 30 September 2020, then to 31 January 2021 and again to 31 March 2021. Owing to the second wave of Covid-19, it is expected that this date will be extended further. More importantly, blanket extensions imply that foreign nationals’ expired visas and permits are deemed to be valid if they did expire around or during the lockdown.

Public and private offices or institutions should therefore take notice that the permits of refugees and asylum seekers are deemed valid and they shouldn’t be turned away when trying to access important services. All the rights, benefits and obligations of refugees and asylum seekers should remain the same and that they shouldn’t be penalised when it is clear that their permits expired during the lockdown.

It is not disputable that the refugee reception offices have been closed since the start of the lockdown and remain closed until the minister decides otherwise.

It is therefore surprising that organs of the state are reluctant to accept the permits of refugees and asylum seekers on the grounds that they are expired. The South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) has been turning away refugees who want to apply for renewal of social grants or social relief of distress, and the traffic departments have been refusing to renew professional driving permits.

Refugees and asylum seekers have been struggling to register businesses with the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission, and to apply for trading licences with municipal offices and for admission to basic or higher education. Some employers are reluctant to recruit refugees or asylum seekers whose documents have expired or to renew their employment contracts. They also find it difficult to open new bank accounts.

These frustrations add to the existing problems refugees and asylum seekers face when trying to access public services. Findings of my 2018 doctoral study indicated that asylum seekers are, for example, traditionally excluded from social grants to avoid the high impermissible costs that may be incurred by the state should they be included in various socio-economic programmes. This exclusion is grounded in the notion that 90% of asylum seekers are economic migrants or job seekers who do not fall within or deserve refugee protection. Unsurprisingly, Covid-19 relief measures weren’t extended to refugees and asylum seekers despite the latter being the most vulnerable group.

The salient question that we have to ask ourselves is: to what extent are refugees and asylum seekers entitled to socio-economic rights and benefits, public services or Covid-19 relief measures? Indeed, this is a controversial question complicated by the national understanding that refugees and asylum seekers are in the country to benefit from the fruits of democracy.

The question refugees and asylum seekers ask themselves is whether the department values their well-being as much as it does that of citizens.

This view disregards the fact that South Africa acceded to international refugee treaties and incorporated these treaties into its legal system through the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 (as amended). This act provides that refugees are entitled to all rights in the Bill of Rights, except those rights that are expressly reserved for citizens. Sections 26, 27, 28(1)(c), and 29 of the Constitution provide “everyone” with the right of access to adequate housing (or shelter), healthcare services, sufficient food (or basic nutrition), sufficient water, social assistance and social security as well as education. This seems to indicate that refugees and asylum seekers are entitled to socio-economic rights or services.

The Refugees Act, read through the lens of these constitutional provisions, signals South Africa’s intention to offer effective protection to refugees and asylum seekers, to respond to their suffering caused by past persecutions in their home countries, or by disasters occurring in South Africa. The onus rests on South Africa to restore their self-reliance, participation and agency as well as to protect their dignity. This can only be done if they are given access to public services. Documenting refugees and asylum seekers and timely renewal of documents are core mechanisms to make such access possible.

Unlike other foreign nationals, refugees and asylum seekers are, irrespective of the temporary nature of their stay, not required to be self-reliant and economically independent in order to be admitted to the country. Rather, they are admitted because of humanitarian reasons and should thus be offered the necessary humanitarian protection.

However, during this lockdown, institutions providing public services have relied on the expiry of permits of refugees and asylum seekers to deny them the services they are entitled to — services that they need to lead a dignified life. The denial of such services — on the basis of the expiry of a permit — is inconsistent with the ministerial directives issued by the minister of Home Affairs for compliance with the lockdown regulations.

The question refugees and asylum seekers ask themselves is whether the department values their well-being as much as it does that of citizens. The refugee reception offices have been closed on the grounds that long queues at these offices may facilitate the spread of the Covid-19 virus if people don’t adhere to social distancing, wearing of masks, and sanitising of hands. However, we see the same queues (or crowds) at the offices of Home Affairs serving citizens. There is always a huge crowd with not much social distancing.

Refugees and asylum seekers feel that the closure of refugee reception offices works to frustrate their access to services and not to protect them. Furthermore, they feel that the closure will cause a huge backlog that the department will find hard to recover from. It should be noted that for many years the department has been unable to clear the backlog of refugee status appeals, certification applications and appeals thereof and, in 2019, had to approach the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees for help. When the lockdown began in March 2020, the issue of the backlog had not yet been resolved.

In light of the above, the refugee reception offices should reopen and serve refugees and asylum seekers to avoid future irregularities stemming from accumulated backlogs. The reopening will restore hope for refugees and asylum seekers for access to services they deserve

www.samigration.com

It is not disputable that the refugee reception offices have been closed since the start of the lockdown and remain closed until the minister decides otherwise.

The question refugees and asylum seekers ask themselves is whether the department values their well-being as much as it does that of citizens.

www.samigration.com

South Africa’s rigid policy on immigration of skilled people is hard to fathom

South Africa’s rigid policy on immigration of skilled people is hard to fathom

Daily Maverick - 23 September 2021

It is hard to understand why South Africa, a country with a massive skills shortage, wastes money and time trying to work out what highly specific skills to let in. An abundance of skills is vital for innovation, economic growth and job creation. The more skills an economy can access, the bigger and more resilient it will be.

A constant theme in economic policy reviews over the past two decades has been that South Africa’s growth prospects are constrained by skills shortages. This has two implications: we need to improve our education and skills systems, and we should be far more open to skilled migration.

The 2017 White Paper on Migration frankly acknowledged that “the economy is desperately short of skills” and that “South Africa has not put in place adequate policy, strategies, institutions and capacity for attracting, recruiting and retaining international migrants with the necessary skills and resources”.

The case for skilled immigration could scarcely have been made more forcefully. It came 15 years after the passage of the 2002 Immigration Act, a period during which much effort had been expended by the Home Affairs, Higher Education and Labour departments in the preparation of lists of skills supposedly in such short supply as to justify entertaining the possibility of allowing migrants who had them to live and work in SA. The lists themselves were required by the act and were supposed to ease the filling of skills shortages.

These lists lacked prima facie credibility because the categories of skills seesawed erratically from one edition to the next. More importantly, as the Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE) argued at the time, they bore no relation to the dynamic needs of a modern economy and, bizarrely, were framed as quotas, setting maximum numbers of migrants to be permitted in under the various categories. None of the quotas were ever filled, but the idea that it was sensible to set a maximum number of skilled migrants — as if a country could have too many doctors, engineers or professors — was symptomatic of an approach to migration that was both grudging and economically illiterate.

In recent years the contents of the skills lists has stabilised, the permit system rationalised, and talk of quotas is long gone. Still, the white paper has not led to the major policy reset that it promised. As a consequence of this, the issue of foreign skills has made it onto President Cyril Ramaphosa’s list of priorities for accelerating economic growth and is being driven by Operation Vulindlela.

So, what are the first fruits of migration “reform”?

The answer is a new list in February 2021, this time of critical skills.

The list is intended to determine the granting of critical skills visas as part of government’s promise to allow in more skilled foreigners. In terms of the act, work visas will be granted to eligible people irrespective of their having been offered a job in SA, and subject only to their qualifications meeting industry standards. Only occupations deemed to be in “acute” shortage, and which cannot be filled by training South Africans in a reasonable time, make it on to the list, which contains 126 precisely defined entries (down from 170 in the 2014 list). Even so, a report that accompanies the draft list asserts (without offering justification) that it will be “absolutely necessary” to reduce this number further.

In sharp contrast, most critics have noted striking omissions from the list including most medical specialisations, and maths and science teachers. Business Unity South Africa identified 27 artisanal skills that it says are also significant omissions.

It is hard to fathom why the list of critical skills has been reduced in a context in which it seems clear that a precipitous drop in immigration has been evident over recent years.

Department of Home Affairs annual reports from 2015 to 2020 record considerably fewer applications for skills and business visas than for the period 2011 to 2014. These statistics are for applications: The Department of Home Affairs doesn’t say how many applications were actually approved in either period.

Without a new approach, all the tinkering and tweaks to laws and regulations will be in vain, and the next immigration white paper will again bemoan our desperate shortage of skills

When it comes to actually making policy, none of the 2017 white paper’s inclusive and dynamic approach has been enacted. Policy remains based on the assumption that the needs of the economy can be defined in minute detail through some form of manpower planning, the goal of which is to ensure that only the barest minimum of immigrants is admitted, and each on the basis of a precisely specified skill. Restricting skilled migration, rather than enabling it, is still the goal.

It is also hard to understand why a country with a massive skills shortage wastes money and time trying to work out what highly specific skills to let in. A dynamic modern economy is not composed of feudal crafts that might plausibly be managed by guilds and does not work the way the compilers of the skills lists assume. SA should have a much more open approach to immigration for skills of all kinds. Most importantly, we should go out and actively market the country as a destination for skilled, energetic and ambitious people.

The reasons for this are self-evident: an abundance of skills, whether professional, technical, artisanal or (especially) entrepreneurial, is vital for innovation, economic growth and job creation. The more skills an economy can access, the bigger and more resilient it will be.

Of course, if skilled foreigners are to be welcomed, we must have some measure of certainty that they have the skills they claim to have. Qualifications must be formal, vetted and come from acceptable sources; track records should be traceable.

Beyond those basic minima, the approach has to be as open and inclusive as possible. We should be actively helping potential migrants through the process, not minimising the number who are eligible and throwing up every imaginable bureaucratic obstacle to success.

We should go further. SA should be actively recruiting skilled migrants and encouraging them to apply to move to SA. There appears, however, to be little official understanding that skilled people might need to be persuaded to immigrate. This should be a task actively pursued by our embassies and consulates (and not just the one in Cuba), working through dedicated people with the appropriate economic knowledge and positive attitudes about the links between skills and growth.

It is not enough merely to change the relevant laws and lists. We need to change attitudes across government, but especially in the Department of Home Affairs and foreign embassies. We need to work hard to persuade South Africans that immigration of skilled foreigners is not a threat to them, but a vital step in making the country more prosperous and inclusive.

The attractions of skilled immigration may seem obvious to an economist or a journalist or a government official in a well-paid and secure job, but they are not obvious to everyone. It’s time to recognise all the positive effects that Zimbabwean and Indian doctors, nurses and teachers, traders from across the African continent and Asia, factory managers from China and investors from West Africa can have for our skills pool and for our levels of economic activity.

Ultimately, gaining wide public acceptance for skilled immigration will require the expenditure of political capital, energy and courage. The president’s list of priority reforms should not focus on a shortened critical skills list but on how to open SA to the foreign skills that will help drive faster economic growth.

Without a new approach, all the tinkering and tweaks to laws and regulations will be in vain, and the next immigration white paper will again bemoan our desperate shortage of skills.

www.samigration.com

Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act 'impairs dignity of unmarried fathers' - ConCourt

Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act 'impairs dignity of unmarried fathers' - ConCourt

News24 – 24 September 2021

Section 10 of Births and Deaths Registration Act has been declared unconstitutional.

The Constitutional Court has declared a section of the Births and Deaths Registration Act unconstitutional.
The section does not allow an unmarried father to register his child's birth under his surname, unless the mother gives consent or is present.
A ConCourt judge says there is no justification for differentiating between married and unmarried fathers.

The Constitutional Court has declared section 10 of the Births and Deaths Registration Act - which does not allow an unmarried father to register his child's birth under his surname, unless the mother is present or gives consent - unconstitutional.

In a judgment by Justice Margaret Victor on Wednesday, which was read out by Justice Steven Majiedt, the court found there was no justification for differentiating between married and unmarried fathers.

"Section 10 of the act impairs the dignity of unmarried fathers, whose bonds with their children are deemed less worthy than the children of married parents," Majiedt said.

The apex court confirmed a 2020 ruling by the Eastern Cape High Court, which found the act invalid and inconsistent.

Father Menzile Lawrence Naki approached the court after the Department of Home Affairs refused to register his child under his surname because the mother was an undocumented Democratic Republic of Congo national.

Consent

The department would also not allow him to register the birth, without the mother's consent.

Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng was one of two dissenting justices. He acknowledged that the act discriminated against unmarried fathers, but held the discrimination was reasonable, justifiable and fair.

"The chief justice holds that children are vulnerable and their best interests are of paramount importance in issues that concern them have to be addressed.

"The chief justice further reasons that they must be protected and not exposed to the risks of being easily claimed and adopted by people, whose relationship with them or subsequently to be in their lives, has been established," said Majiedt.

www.samigration.com

How to spend ten days in Switzerland to skip UK's red list – for less than airport quarantine

How to spend ten days in Switzerland to skip UK's red list – for less than airport quarantine

Business Insider SA – 22September 2021

The UK's red list makes travel there arduous and expensive.
But a growing number of amber-status countries are now welcoming vaccinated South Africans.
Switzerland is one of them - and it's an ideal stopover to avoid a UK quarantine.
Although not exactly cheap, you can have a bucket-list ten-day holiday in Switzerland for about as much as a UK hotel quarantine.
Return flights to London via Zurich, for example, can cost less than R13,000.
And you can add unlimited train travel for another R5,000 - which leaves you with R32,000 to spend on accommodation and fondues.
Here's one way to skip hotel quarantine and spend ten days in Switzerland.

South Africans looking to travel to the United Kingdom - and those looking to return to the UK from here - are still unable to do so with ease, thanks to the UK's enduring 'red list'. It requires travellers from certain countries to quarantine on arrival at an airport hotel at their own expense - and at current rates, a mandatory airport hotel quarantine costs roughly R50,000.

The idea of paying R50,000 to spend a week in a small hotel room has led many South Africans to seek more attractive alternatives - like taking a detour through Montenegro. But for roughly the same amount as you'll pay to hole up in a tiny hotel room at Heathrow, it's possible to spend a week basking in the Swiss countryside - and avoid quarantine altogether.

Although slightly pricier than alternatives in the Balkans, Switzerland is closer and more convenient for travellers looking to avoid quarantining in the United Kingdom - and it's not necessarily as expensive as it is reputed to be.

With a bit of planning and by cutting some corners, like avoiding high-end city hotels and mountain-top fondues, it's possible to experience Switzerland on something of a responsible budget.

Here's how to avoid the UK's red list by spending some time in Switzerland first:

Buy a rail pass

Trains aren't the cheapest way to explore Switzerland, but they are the best. Commuter and panoramic scenic trains connect most places you'll want to visit, and for around R5,000 you can ride several of the country's most iconic routes over ten days.

It's possible to purchase individual tickets at stations or online - but prices often fluctuate and can be more expensive at the last minute. A travel pass alleviates this stress - and allows you to cash in on the extravagant panoramic routes and only pay cash for the shorter and cheaper connections.

For a red list-dodging stay in Switzerland, your best bet is a three or four days, second class Swiss Flex Pass. This pass allows you to spend three or four days on trains within 30 days - and includes other bonuses like boat rides, museum entrances, and discounts at some attractions.

Adults currently pay around R5,400 for the pass that allows four days of travel within one month; youth pay around R4,500. It may sound pricey - but a single Swiss train trip like the Glacier Express can easily cost upwards of R2,500.

An ultimate ten-day Switzerland rail itinerary

Lucerne

Leave Zurich and head straight for Lucerne - Switzerland's biggest city is expensive and not as picturesque as other parts of the country. The train journey between the two isn't worth spending a rail pass travel day on - you can buy this ticket separately for roughly R400.

Lucerne, like Zurich, isn't cheap - but it's scenic, and it's worth spending a night here to take in panoramic aerial views from the city walls and towers.

And before you leave the following day, a walk through the Old Town and across the famous covered bridges is a rewarding experience, too - and it doesn't cost a cent.

Hotels in Lucerne are expensive and largely unappealing and will force you to eat out in overpriced restaurants. If you're on a tight budget, there are dozens of admittedly small and somewhat unexciting Airbnb options that cost as little as R1,000 per night for two people.

Lauterbrunnen is essentially the stuff of Swiss countryside dreams - and if you're fit enough to tackle the high altitude hikes, there are few better places to appreciate the Alps, and no better way to spend your time in Switzerland, than this.

A midweek stay in a budget Lauterbrunnen hotel room costs around R1,500 per night for two people. But there are Airbnb rentals in the valley and neighbouring villages for significantly less - though some might require a bit of a trek or additional train ride to reach.

And if you're a fan of camping, and it's not too cold, there are few better places in the world to pitch a tent than at one of Lauterbrunnen's pristine campsites.

Your Swiss Travel Pass also includes passage on select boats - and the two lakes that gave Interlaken its name are worthy of an afternoon water excursion.

Montreux

From Interlaken, the GoldenPass Line continues to Lake Geneva. And if you time it carefully with a change at Zweisimmen, you can board a classic train carriage for the remainder of the journey that's straight out of a Wes Anderson movie.

From St Moritz, you have two options. Under normal circumstances, the Bernina Express, which cuts through into Italy and back to Lugano, is a route that rivals most others in Switzerland.

The Bernina Express. Photo: Andrew Thompson.

But time, money, and coronavirus restrictions might make returning to Lucerne via Italy complex - in which case a direct trip back is the most sensible option.

The direct journey back to the city by train takes about six hours. Although Switzerland doesn't market it as well as the GoldenPass Line, Glacier Express, or Bernina Express, it's a pleasingly scenic way to end a whirlwind trip of Switzerland and its rail routes.

Getting to, and into, Switzerland

The cheapest and most convenient starting point for a trip to Switzerland is to fly from Johannesburg to Zurich.

For dates in October, it's possible to find a multi-city air ticket between Johannesburg, Zurich, London, and Johannesburg, for under R13,000 - including some direct flight options on Swiss Air Lines.

Given Covid-19 restrictions, getting into Switzerland is slightly more challenging than it once was. The situation might change at a moment's notice - but with Europe slowly reopening to South African travellers, those who are fully vaccinated are not required at present to quarantine on arrival in many countries.

Avoiding UK quarantine

Switzerland is currently on the United Kingdom's Amber List. Provided travellers remain in this region for 10 days, it should be enough to avoid South Africa's red list status.

According to UK government regulations, prior to travel, unvaccinated travellers arriving in England must have booked and paid for two future Covid-19 tests, and complete a passenger locator form. On arrival in England, unvaccinated travellers must present a negative Covid test.

Travellers from Amber regions do not currently have to quarantine at a government-mandated facility - but must quarantine in the place they are staying for 10 days - and take the Covid-19 tests on days two and eight.

Fully vaccinated travellers must take a Covid-19 test on or before day two.

www.samigration.com

Canada reopens to fully vaccinated South Africans – but travelling with teens will be tough

Canada reopens to fully vaccinated South Africans – but travelling with teens will be tough

Business Insider SA - 20 Sep 2021

Fully vaccinated South Africans can now visit Canada for non-essential purposes without needing to quarantine.
The updated regulations came into effect on Tuesday and considers travellers fully vaccinated two weeks after receiving their last dose of an approved vaccine.
Children between the ages of 12 to 17 also need to be vaccinated to avoid quarantine.
But with vaccines in South Africa not yet approved for anybody under the age of 18, travelling to Canada with teenagers will be tricky.

Canada has reopened to fully vaccinated travellers visiting for non-essential purposes. But teenagers travelling from South Africa will still be forced to endure a two-week quarantine.

Canada is the latest country to ease restrictions for fully vaccinated travellers, following in the footsteps of several European nations which have reopened to South Africans. The move marks an important milestone in accessing North America, with South Africans still heavily restricted from entering the United States (US), even if they are fully vaccinated.

The new travel reprieve, which came into effect on Tuesday, allows fully vaccinated South Africans to enter Canada as tourists without needing to quarantine for 14 days. Previously, South Africans were banned from entering Canada, unless they qualified for a travel exemption – for workers, students, or compassionate reasons – and were still required to quarantine.

Travellers are considered to be fully vaccinated 14 days after receiving their final dose of the Covid-19 vaccine. Only vaccines approved by Canada – Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, AstraZeneca-Covishield, and Johnson & Johnson’ Janssen – will be accepted.

Proof of vaccination must be submitted via ArriveCAN, through the mobile app or website. A valid pre-arrival Covid-19 molecular test result, taken no more than 72 hours before flying to Canada, must also be uploaded to ArriveCAN. Rapid antigen tests are not accepted.

Once mandatory information – including flight, passport, and travel itinerary details – is submitted to ArriveCAN, the visitor will receive a digital receipt which must be presented prior to boarding. In addition, passengers must still travel with a physical copy of their vaccination certificate and Covid-19 test result.

Travellers may be randomly selected for Covid-19 testing on arrival in Canada. Those who test positive will be required to self-isolate.

And while South African travellers can look forward to a quarantine-free holiday in Canada, teenagers won't be so lucky. Unvaccinated children under 12-years-old can skip quarantine, but are not allowed to attend school or day-care for two weeks.

Unvaccinated children between the ages of 12 to 17 will be required to quarantine for two weeks. With vaccines in South Africa not yet approved for use on anybody younger than 18-years-old, teenagers looking to visit Canada will be forced to stay indoors.

In the US and Canada, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine has been administered to children between the ages of 12 to 17 since May.

Almost 54 million vaccine doses have been administered in Canada, with more than 67% of the population being fully vaccinated against Covid

Subscribe by email

Subscribe by email