• The Netherlands has announced that flights from South Africa will be allowed to resume, with travel exemptions offered to non-EU residents.
• Although most South Africans still won't be able to enter the Netherlands due to an ongoing EU ban, students, key workers, and those with compelling family reasons will be allowed to travel.
• Permitted travellers will be subjected to a shorter quarantine period if they test negative for Covid-19 on day five of their self-isolation.
• South African passengers can now also transit through Amsterdam Airport Schiphol.

The Netherlands has ended a six-month-long travel ban which restricted flights from South Africa amid concerns about a new Covid-19 variant. While the lifting of restrictions will benefit returning Dutch residents and in-bound tourists, most South Africans will still not be able to enter the Netherlands due to the ongoing ban imposed by the European Union (EU).

The Netherlands was one of many countries which reacted to the discovery of the 501Y.V2 variant by imposing a blanket travel ban on South African visitors. Since late-January, limited flights departing from South Africa have only been permitted to carry Dutch nationals and EU citizens into Amsterdam.

This travel ban has been extended several times on a monthly basis, but on Tuesday morning, the Dutch ministry of foreign affairs announced that flights from South Africa would be reinstated.

And, although the EU Commission recently recommended that member states allow fully vaccinated travellers to enter their respective countries, this reopening policy has not yet been adopted by all European nations. A Digital Covid Certificate – including authorised certification of vaccination and negative test results – is currently being trialed within the EU and is expected to rollout to all member states in July.

Until then, most South African travellers remain barred from entering the Netherlands or any other country within the EU. There are, however, several exceptions beyond returning Dutch or EU nationals which permit South Africans entry into the Netherlands.

Non-EU travellers, along with those from “high-risk” countries, must present a negative Covid-19 test result – obtained within 24 hours of departure – before boarding a flight to the Netherlands.

But where previous rules required visitors to endure ten days of quarantine, travellers can now exit self-isolation after just five days. To do this, travellers will need to present another negative Covid-19 test result on the fifth day of quarantine. Travellers will also need to complete a Health Declaration Form.

Travel exemptions extended to non-EU residents and long-stay visa holders are determined according to five primary categories:

• Study, knowledge, and research
• For work
• Compelling reasons to visit family
• Transit or transfer
• Humanitarian reasons

South African students travelling to the Netherlands for a short stay of less than three months – with proof of enrolment at a recognised educational institution – will be permitted to enter. Similarly, recognised researchers and scientists are also exempt from the EU travel ban.

Care workers, doctors, and nurses – listed as "key workers" – are allowed to travel to the EU, as are travellers employed in the following sectors within the EU:

• Transport (container ships, bulk carriers, tankers, fishing boats)
• Energy (oil or gas platform, wind farm)

Seafarers on commercial vessels with a length of 24 metres or more will also be permitted entry as will flight crews. Journalists and "elite athletes" may also apply for a travel exemption into the EU.

Family members in the first or second degree will be allowed to travel for the purpose of visiting a terminally ill family member or attending a funeral. Travellers will also be allowed into the EU to see their new-born child or grandchild.

South African travellers will now also be allowed to transit through Amsterdam Airport Schiphol on to another non-EU country.

The Netherlands' flag carrier, KLM, is currently offering daily flights between Amsterdam and Johannesburg's OR Tambo International Airport. Three weekly flights are offered to Cape Town.

An employee at the AG's office has been arrested.

Getty Images

• A general manager at the office of the Auditor-General in Pretoria has been arrested.
• He allegedly offered a Home Affairs official a R3 000 bribe.
• According to the Hawks, it emerged that his ID card and his daughter's birth certificate were fraudulent.

A general manager at the office of the Auditor-General has been arrested for allegedly trying to bribe a Home Affairs official. 

The 46-year-old foreign national was arrested on Wednesday in a sting operation by the Hawks after he allegedly offered the official R3 000. 

The man visited the Department of Home Affairs in Randburg to apply for his 14-year-old daughter's South African passport. 

"Upon a systematic interview with the immigration officers, the suspect allegedly failed to produce citizenship rights, which permitted him to possess a South African smart identity card and also a birth certificate for his said daughter," said Hawks spokesperson Captain Ndivhuwo Mulamu. 

Mulamu said the man allegedly pleaded with the immigration officer to return the smart ID and birth certificate in exchange for a bribe. 

"Further investigation revealed that both the identity smart card and birth certificate possessed by the suspect were fraudulent. The suspect was subsequently charged with fraud and corruption," Mulamu said.

The man is expected to appear in the Randburg Magistrate's Court on Friday.

The Hawks acting provincial head in Gauteng, Brigadier Wendy Mashwabane, applauded police for their work. 

"We appeal to the public to report any criminal activities to law enforcement agencies for justice to take its course. Furthermore, we appreciate the immigration officers for not falling prey to perpetrators, who would allegedly break the law to get what they want," Mashwabane said.

Auditor-General Tsakani Maluleke said the matter was not to be taken lightly.

www.samigration.com

Rights groups, UNHCR and EU criticise move, which some fear will have a domino effect and see other nations opt out of responsibilities.

Critics worry the plan will undermine the safety and welfare of refugees and compromise their human rights as well as allow Denmark to duck its obligations within the EU

Denmark’s parliament has passed a law enabling the Nordic country to deport asylum seekers to countries outside Europe, defying calls to abandon the legislation from NGOs and the United Nations.

The move was headed by Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen’s Social Democratic anti-immigration government; 70 legislators voted for the proposal and 24 against on Thursday.

The law allows Denmark, which has gained notoriety for its hardline immigration policies over the last decade, to move refugees arriving on Danish soil to asylum centres in a partner country.

There, asylum seekers would have their cases reviewed and possibly obtain protection in that country.

In practice, people would have to apply for asylum at the Danish border and then be flown to a centre outside Europe while being processed.

Denmark would foot the bill for the operation, but processing asylum requests would be carried out by the host country.

“If you apply for asylum in Denmark, you know that you will be sent back to a country outside Europe, and therefore we hope that people will stop seeking asylum in Denmark,” government spokesman Rasmus Stoklund told broadcaster DR.

The wealthy Scandinavian nation has a declared goal of receiving zero asylum seekers and instead aims to only accept refugees under the UN’s quota system.

Denmark has yet to reach an agreement with a partner nation, but Stoklund said it was negotiating with several candidate countries.

‘Irresponsible’

Critics worry the plan will undermine the welfare of refugees while allowing Denmark to duck its obligations within the EU.

The bloc’s executive arm said it had “fundamental concerns” about the new law.

“It is not possible under existing EU rules or proposals under the new pact for migration and asylum,” said European Commission spokesperson Adalbert Jahnz, adding that the right to claim asylum was fundamental in the EU.

Charlotte Slente, head of the Danish Refugee Council, said: “If a rich country such as Denmark is not willing to take responsibility, there is a significant risk that countries hosting far larger number of refugees will also opt out and give up on global efforts to find joint and sustainable solutions.”

Similar moves in Australia and on some Greek islands had led to “serious incidents of detention, physical assault, slow asylum proceedings, lack of access to healthcare and lack of access to legal assistance”, she said, adding the law sends a problematic signal “especially to the often poorer countries in the world, which take by far the greatest responsibility for the world’s refugees”.

The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) last month called on Denmark to not pass the bill, which it said could catalyse a “race to the bottom” if other European countries begin mimicking Denmark’s policy.

“UNHCR remains firmly opposed to externalisation initiatives that forcibly transfer asylum seekers to other countries,” UNHCR Assistant High Commissioner Gillian Triggs said in May.

Last year, 1,547 people sought asylum in Denmark, down from 2,716 the year before, according to the country’s Ministry of Immigration and Integration.

Yearly applications in the last decade peaked in 2015 when 21,316 people applied for asylum during the height of the European refugee crisis.

www.samigration.com

Crisis to come at a head at the end of June and July, when applications for visa renewals are submitted

A child waits in line at a department of home affairs office. Picture: SUNDAY TIMES

The Covid-19 pandemic and provisions of the Disaster Management Act have reduced already slow home affairs processes to a crawl, affecting thousands of people and creating a backlog that could take years to clear.

The Covid-19 pandemic is set to further delay and derail home affairs processes, with potentially tens of thousands of people affected.

While the department of home affairs was mandated to limit services at the onset of the state of disaster in March 2020, it has been slow and inconsistent in resuming services. Only visa-related services are being rendered, with no permanent residence or citizenship-related services  permitted.

After initially issuing badly drafted and confusing directives, the department confirmed in March 2021 that it had extended the validity of short-term visas to the end of June, and the validity of long-term visas to the end of July, which allowed breathing room for those whose visas expired during the national state of disaster.

However, the scene is being set for a huge backlog at the end of June and July, when thousands of people must submit applications for renewal at a time when home affairs processes appear to be slower and more inconsistent than ever.

Despite officially not processing permanent resident and citizenship-related applications; home affairs is processing permanent residence applications, but with startling inconsistency. And it is rejecting more than it approves. Applicants are not able to appeal against these negative outcomes since the department is not meant to be rendering these services, which is also going to create a huge backlog once they resume doing so.

It should be noted that the preamble to the act provides, among other things, that visas and permanent residence permits are to be issued expeditiously and on the basis of simplified procedures and objectives without consuming excessive administrative capacity. The department is not fulfilling its obligations in this regard: random rejections are set to create huge administrative burdens for an already severely understaffed department.

Our office is seeing numerous visa and permit applications rejected for reasons that should not apply. In the case of temporary visa applications, where it was once rare for an application to be pending for more than three months, we now have a backlog of up to five months, while the department says it is not dealing with citizenship services, determination of status applications or anything related to them — even inquiries. This raises questions about a backlog existing at all when the department offers fewer services than it did before the pandemic.

In addition, the lack of focus on permanent residence raises concerns that efforts may still continue to remove permanent residency as a status category and eliminate the possibility of becoming a citizen by naturalisation, as regulated in the SA Citizenship Amendment Act. There are signs, based on the department’s white paper of 2017 and the revised immigration bill that is being drafted, that categories of visas and permits in existence might be on their way out, placing holders of these visas and permits in a precarious position.

We are also seeing a growing number of rejections of critical skills visa applications, freelance work applications by foreign spouses of South Africans, and work authorisations for foreigners with retired-people visas. These rejections, often for nonsensical reasons — for example, department staff stating that they could not get hold of an applicant’s employer — strip people of their right to work. Because appeals take so long to process, many applicants risk losing their jobs, adding to the unemployment problem at a time when the government should be supporting the labour market and helping to grow the economy. This situation will result in a flood of applications and appeals when the department resumes full service again.

However, while challenges remain for foreign-born people seeking to live and work in SA, there is a glimmer of hope for SA-born people hoping to work abroad and remain SA citizens. South Africans are frequently stripped of their SA citizenship without warning if they apply for citizenship of another country.

A recent court case launched by the DA challenges this, arguing that section 6(1)(a) of the Citizenship Act of 1995 is inconsistent with the constitution because certain clauses of the act deprive citizens who have assumed foreign citizenship of their right to vote, hold an SA passport and retain citizenship. Home affairs countered that South Africans could retain their SA citizenship — and thus have dual citizenship — if they complied with the steps laid out in the act.

This law states that individuals will automatically lose their citizenship unless they apply for a letter of retention to keep it, and specifically excludes dual citizenship by minors and/or by marriage. As South Africans confronted by job losses and a difficult economic environment look to other countries for opportunities, they should be able to retain their citizenship while abroad — if they follow the processes.

For those who were summarily stripped of citizenship there is hope that while judgment in this case was reserved, if the DA should win they could be permitted to reclaim their citizenship in the future. 

www.samigration.com

Politcal parties raised concern of the problem of long queues where often people are turned away because the system is offline.

Minister Aaron Motsoaledi came under fire from some opposition parties in the National Assembly for what they say is the chaotic state of the Home Affairs department.

Political parties raised concern about the problem of long queues where often people are turned away because the system is offline.

During the department’s budget vote debate, parties also questioned why the department has still not introduced an online appointment system.

Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) Liezl van der Merwe says, “Imagine waking up at 4 am using your last bit of money on transport to go to your local Home Affairs office hoping that today you’ll be able to get an identity document (ID) because that’s what stands between you and a job. It is what stands between you and providing for your family. What stands between you and a brighter future. Then consider the mother who travels to a Home Affairs office in search of a birth certificate that document stands between her and a Sassa grant without which she cannot feed her newborn baby but for many visiting a Home Affairs office in taking a day off work to queue for hours on End only to be told to come back tomorrow because the systems are offline again systems that are perpetually offline have become synonymous with this department.”

Democratic Alliance (DA) Angel Khanyile says, “The issue of long shoes in different parts of the country and by various members of the portfolio committee had been raised on numerous occasions yet the situation remains the same of this country spent days and weeks without being attended to Andrews days off work because the department has not introduced the appointment system.”

Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) Mgcini Tshwaku illustrates this point by quoting KwaZulu Natal Premier Sihle Zikalala following a recent visit to a Home Affairs Office.

Zikalala said, “There are people who are arriving at Home Affairs at 4:00 in the morning and the home Affairs open at 10:00 where it opens at 8:00 and then people start working at 10:00 and up until 12 and then after that, you find that they’ll system are offline they’ll go to lunch and you will not know what is actually happening. What is happening right now is a crisis everywhere…”

“People are crying about the system being online not being helped up on time by the Home Affairs. So in that budget, we did not see a plan or money allocated to saying that is what we’re going to make sure that none of which I need the money so that you are ensuring that these queues and also the systems which are offline at the Home Affairs are going to be eradicated,” Tshwaku explains.

Motsoaledi acknowledged the problem and assured members that they are tackling it.

“When you listen to members of the opposition parties talking about the documentation you’d think everything in Home Affairs has. I mean all the offices are closed and there’s no work. The challenge about down time which we experience from SITA. We have mentioned it in the portfolio committee. We have got a plan and a program to deal with that. It also disappoints us I must say and I’m not going to hide it,” Motsoaledi says.

www.samigration.com