The refugees locked themselves inside the Central Methodist Church and refused to move on day seven of the lockdown on 2 April 2020. (Photo by Gallo Images/Brenton Geach) Less

The window is closing for refugees and asylum seekers protesting in Cape Town to either reintegrate into local communities or repatriate. But a small group of ‘hardliners’ are holding on to the vain hope of resettlement to Canada – a promise made to them by persuasive leaders who have since been deported or imprisoned.

Jean-Pierre Balous, Papy Sukami and Aline Bukuru made headlines as the leaders of an ongoing protest against xenophobic violence in South Africa. 

In the demonstration, which began in October 2019 outside the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Cape Town, hundreds of refugees and asylum seekers demanded resettlement to Canada. 

After being forcibly removed from the UNHCR offices, the group occupied the Central Methodist Church on Greenmarket Square. This continued until the Covid-19 pandemic struck when the group, which had split into two factions, was moved to separate, temporary shelters at Paint City and Wingfield.  

The camps are now earmarked for closure on 15 May. 

Protesters who had pinned their hopes on a one-way ticket to Canada are now left with two options: To reintegrate into communities in and around Cape Town, or be voluntarily repatriated to their countries of origin.  

About 100 police officers had to break down the church doors to get in. The refugees were then loaded onto buses and moved to a location in Bellville. (Photo by Gallo Images/Brenton Geach)

Parliament’s Home Affairs Committee said 414 refugees and asylum seekers had opted for reintegration while 305 have chosen voluntary repatriation. 

Those reintegrating have been offered three months’ rental and food supply.  

However, concerns remain over about 350 “hardliners” who are refusing to leave the camps and continuing their demands for resettlement.  

According to the committee, the hardliners are part of the faction led by Balous and his wife, Aline Bukuru, both of whom run a registered NGO called Women and Children at Concern (WCC). Balous is languishing in Prison, reportedly Pollsmoor,  after he was arrested for assaulting police officers during a court appearance in early March. He is at risk of deportation once his criminal case has run its course. He is due to reappear in court in June 2021.  

Bukuru was deported to Congo on 31 March, along with Sukami, the leader of the rival faction.  

In total, 32 protesters have been deported since October 2020. According to Home Affairs they were undocumented persons who did not qualify for asylum and international protection.  

For Sukami, who was also battling a criminal case, his asylum-seeker papers were rejected by the Refugee Appeals Authority of South Africa (Raasa).

He was arrested in January 2020 on charges of assault and robbery relating to an incident outside the UNHCR offices in October 2019. Accompanied by a few men, Sukami allegedly beat and robbed two Congolese freelance journalists. 

The journalists, Serge Shaumba and Jurol Loemba, accused Sukami of being a propagandist and the ringleader of a gang. 

Steered by Balous, the three protest leaders had fashioned themselves as champions for refugee rights.

On Sukami’s Twitter page he has frequently spoken out against the Department of Home Affairs, in one instance comparing xenophobia to the apartheid regime. His Twitter bio labels him as a human rights activist, an evangelist, civil engineer and chairperson of a Congolese political party called Kongomani Green. 

According to the organisation’s Twitter page set up in May 2019, the party is in “exile” and based in the US, Norway, South Africa, the UK, France and Belgium. 

In a social media post, Sukami said the party’s objectives were to protect Congo’s environment:

During a Home Affairs parliamentary committee meeting on Tuesday, Minister Aaron Motsoaledi used Sukami’s leadership position in the Kongomani Green party to cast aspersions on his asylum-seeker claims.

“There was a story that people were running away from their countries because they were running away from persecution, yet no one is persecuting them and one is even able to form a political party. He tweeted about it for the whole world to see without the DRC chasing him away. Meaning when he came here and claimed to be a refugee, that was a lie already,” he said.

Sukami denied on social media that he had been deported but rather voluntarily repatriated to the DRC. 

Congolese refugee protest leader Jean-Pierre Balous at the Cape Town High Court on 17 February 2020. The refugees had been staying in and around the Central Methodist Church on Greenmarket Square since October 2019. (Photo by Gallo Images/Brenton Geach)

He had been Balous’s right-hand man until the pair had a violent falling out in December 2019, which caused a factional split. Balous was accused of raising money through his non-profit WCC for personal gain.

Balous’s supporters claim the NPO pioneered the protest. According to its website, WCC, which is based in Grassy Park, Cape Town and embedded in a Christian ethos, “strives to uplift refugees and asylum seekers, especially women and children”.

Fingers were often pointed at Balous for misleading protesters into believing resettlement was imminent although the UNHCR had announced that the demand for group resettlement was not possible under international law.

Balous, who is proficient in English was often the intermediary between authorities and the protesters, a position of power that was considered exploitative.

During a court case in February 2020, where the City of Cape Town was granted a court order to remove protesters who were sleeping outside the Central Methodist Church (Sukami’s faction had been banished outside), Judge Daniel Thulare accused Balous of “abusing the right to protest” and creating a “a self-governing territory within the City of Cape Town”.

The group had initially sought shelter in the church after being forcibly removed from the UNHCR offices. They, however, overstayed their welcome and refused to leave. By the time they were relocated to Paint City and Wingfield when the country went into lockdown, they had caused approximately R600,000 worth of damage.

Balous also had a notable violent streak.

He was accused of harassing, intimidating and/or assaulting anyone who challenged his authority. New Frame reported that a number of refugee and migrant organisations in Cape Town had distanced themselves from Balous and at least three people had protection orders against him.

According to New Frame, those who know Balous claim that he and his wife had tried unsuccessfully to be resettled to a third country more than once.

Balous was also accused of instigating an attack on a delegation of faith leaders who were engaging protesters at the Central Methodist Church in November 2019. Anglican Archbishop Thabo Makgoba, SAHRC Commissioner Chris Nissen and Reverend Alan Storey were among those assaulted.

A number of people claimed that Balous had tried to gouge out the eyes of Pastor Moise Awilo, who was part of the delegation.

He was often described as a cult-like leader. Balous often used Christianity as a justification for his cause and in one instance, during a rally in the Central Methodist Church attended by Daily Maverick, Balous compared himself to Jesus. Though the migrants did not own the building, people were searched and names taken before anyone could enter the church. There was also a rule that no one except the group’s “leadership” could speak to the media. 

His wife, Aline Bukuru, had initially led a similar protest in November 2019, outside the UNHCR offices in Pretoria. The protest was quashed after the group forced their way onto the UNHCR premises and were removed by police after the North Gauteng High Court granted a court order for the City of Johannesburg to enforce its by-laws.

Bukuru then made her way to Cape Town where she joined the group protesting at the Methodist Church and assumed leadership once her husband had been arrested.

Safety and security mayoral committee member JP Smith warned that the “hardliners” who refuse to leave the temporary shelters once they close down may be dealt with by the courts. 

“If at the end of that there is a group that adamantly resists reintegration [at] the sites, both of which belong to the Department of Public Works, then they will be obligated to determine how to remove persons from those properties. That will have to take the form of an eviction application to the court.

www.samigration.com

Scalabrini court victory for people seeking asylum in South Africa

Home Affairs has been interdicted from implementing certain provisions of the Refugees Act and new Regulations (both implemented on 1 January 2020), which sought to return asylum seekers back to their home country where they could be face detention without trial, rape, torture, or death, merely because he or she was a month late in renewing a visa.

On 30 November 2020, Judge Baartman handed down judgement in the Western Cape High Court, which suspended the operation of certain provisions of the Refugees Act, 1998 and the 2018 Regulations thereto (both of which came into effect on 1 January 2020). The suspended provisions are commonly referred to as the ‘abandonment provisions’. 

The suspension will operate until the constitutional attack against the impugned provisions has been adjudicated on by the Western Cape High Court and, to the extend necessary, confirmed by the Constitutional Court.

The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, represented on a pro bono basis by Norton Rose Fulbright and Advocates David Simonsz and Nomonde Nyembe sought to prevent the short and long term operation of the abandonment provisions, as the provisions infringed on asylum seekers’ rights to life, freedom and security of person, dignity, and equality; and prevented South Africa from fulfilling its international law obligations towards refugees, including the international law principle of non-refoulement.

The abandonment provisions provided that in the event that an asylum seeker fails to renew their asylum visa timeously, their applications for asylum are deemed abandoned. Arrest and deportation would follow for individuals with valid and undecided claims for asylum; back to countries of origin where they could face death, torture, sexual violence, and other forms of persecution from which they originally fled, or to countries experiencing grave disturbances to the public order. Only where an asylum seeker has a compelling reason (and proof thereof) for delaying to renew a permit following a lapse (such as hospitalisation or imprisonment) can the Department of Home Affairs pardon the late renewal.

This is deeply problematic as it means that refugees can be returned to face persecution, without ever having the substantive merits of their asylum application determined. It also leaves asylum seekers vulnerable in South Africa as essentially undocumented foreigners who will struggle to access health care, employment and education while they await the decision of whether their reason for late renewal meets the Department of Home Affairs high threshold.

The reality for asylum seekers is that they are frequently required to renew their asylum visas. In the renewal process, they experience extraordinary delays caused by the administrative failures of the Department of Home Affairs. These are often exacerbated by socio-economic factors such as not having the means to travel to far away Refugee Reception Offices as frequently as is required, waiting in long queues at the Refugee Reception Offices, facing corruption from officials who refuse to renew visas without bribes, or the general inefficiency of the Refugee Reception Offices that are over-worked but under-staffed. 

In light of these realities many asylum seekers fail to renew their visas for valid reasons. Judge Baartman delivered a powerful judgment, emphasising that the case does not involve imaginary victims – the suspended abandonment provisions affect real asylum seekers who could face serious human rights violations should the provisions continue to operate. She criticized the Department’s conduct in the case, which was characterised as regrettable and unhelpful.

The judgement will come as a relief to many asylum seekers who have been unable to renew their visas for valid reasons and will give them an opportunity to do so without the fear of being treated as an illegal foreigner and returned home. This includes many asylum seekers who may have been prevented from renewing their asylum documents prior to the pausing of services at Refugee Reception Offices during the national lockdown – a pause which is set to remain in effect until at least 31 January 2021. Scalabrini Centre, represented by Norton Rose Fulbright, firmly believes the abandonment provisions are unconstitutional and persists in a challenge to this effect.

www.samigration.com

The summer season is almost here, and the European countries are set not to let summer 2020 repeat itself.

European Union Member States, in particular those that heavily rely on tourism, have started to prepare for summer 2021 early at the beginning of the year in an attempt to revive travel to their territory by enabling tourists to safely visit.

Increased testing capacity, total lockdowns at the beginning of the year in a bid to lower the numbers of cases, complete bans on non-essential arrivals, especially from countries with virus mutations, have all been parts of these attempts, SchengenVisaInfo.com reports.

Moreover, the Member States, under the recommendation of the EU, for long now, have been applying traffic light systems in order to differentiate the risk of travel from the rest of the EU countries, imposing restrictions on arrivals based on this system.

The most serious idea within the block has undoubtfully been the creation of the travel certificate, proposed first to the EU Commission by the Prime Minister of Greece Kyriakos Mitsotakis. While the EU has been working on a unified approach for the creation of such a document, the Member States have moved forward establishing their own schemes, claiming that once the EU’s document is ready, they would align their national document with it.

Last weekend, the EU Council’s Permanent Representatives Committee (Coreper) unanimously showed their support for an agreement on the EU travel certificate, previously reached between the Council and the European Parliament on May 20.

Now for the procedures for the document to be completed, the Council will send a letter to the European Parliament, officially communicating the support of the Coreper on the agreement for the establishment of the certificate.

After the legislation is signed into effect, the regulations will be published in the Official Journal of the EU and apply from July 1.

In the meantime, the journey of each Member State towards the reopening has been different from the others and has often depended on how the country handled the virus at the very start and later on the vaccination campaign rollout.

Recently, countries that rely more on tourism, like Greece, have rushed to facilitate entry restrictions and open to international tourists step by step. Even some countries, like France that at the beginning had a tough stance on the reopening of the borders for international travellers, now are slowly catching the pace.

Below, find out how some of the EU and Schengen Area countries have reopened their borders and are preparing to reopen for international tourists this summer.

France

One of the top tourism destinations in Europe, France, has experienced a massive loss of €103 billion during 2020 after the travel and tourism sector’s contribution to France’s gross domestic product (GDP) dropped by 48.8 per cent amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

However, the country is set to stop such a massive loss from taking place again in 2021.

In mid-April, French President Emanuel Macron revealed that France was in its last stage of finalising a plan for the lifting of travel restrictions for vaccinated travellers from the European Union and some third countries like the United States.

“We will progressively lift the restrictions of the beginning of May, which means that we will organise in the summertime with our professionals in France for French European citizens, but as well for American citizens,” he said.

And while the beginning of May has come and gone, France still claims it is working on a concrete solution to permit entry for vaccinated tourists from all around the globe through “a special pass”, as President Macron said.

Instead of the “special pass,” the country has revealed its plans to start categorising other countries according to their COVID-19 situation through the traffic light system, which is currently applied by several other European countries.

The system is used to determine the quarantine measures and other travel restrictions travellers fall subject to by categorising countries in three colours – green, orange and red, based on the number of COVID-19 cases in the previous two weeks before the update of the measures.

“Regarding countries that are outside the European area [EU and Schengen zone countries], we will work on lists and colours. There will be the green countries, orange countries and red countries,” French Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean-Baptiste Lemoyne said to Europe 1 on May 8.

The Minister did not clarify what rules would apply to each country, yet he noted that “only five or six green countries at the moment.” The chances are high that these countries are among the ones in the EU Council’s list of epidemiologically safe third countries. Since May 6, the following countries are on this list: Australia, Israel, New Zealand, Rwanda, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand, as well as China (including Hong Kong and Macao).

Yet, in spite of its plan to reopen for tourism from third countries, the French government has once again shown its determination to prevent COVID-19 cases from being imported from other countries, in particular those with COVID-19 mutations.

On May 7, the government expanded the list of countries for arrivals from which stringent entry restrictions apply by adding Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, Qatar, Sri Lanka, Turkey, and United Arab Emirates. Previously, since April 24, in the list have been Brazil, Argentina, Chile and South Africa.

Greece

A favourite summer destination in particular for Europeans living in the landlocked Member States – Greece, which heavily depends on the tourism sector, has been working since the beginning of the year to reopen its borders in time for summer.

“We will open on May 14, and we will open safely, despite the danger,” Greece’s Tourism Minister Harry Theocharis said in the Greek Parliament on April 6, after in early March the government unfolded its plan for the reopening of the tourism sector.

Before May 14, the country reopened its borders to several third countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Serbia, Israel, and the United Arab Emirates.

In late April, arrivals from more third countries were allowed to enter Greece without having to follow quarantine restrictions include Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, Russia, Rwanda, Singapore, and Thailand.

In order to prepare in time for the summer season, the country has also speeded up vaccinations for workers in several industries, including tourism.

Spain

For over a month now, Spanish authorities have been warning of their plans to permit entry for British tourists, which make up the largest share of foreign tourists during the summer season in Spain, in order to help revive the tourism sector in the country.

On May 24, Monday, a new decree approved by the Spanish government took effect, permitting Britons to enter the country without the need of isolating or testing for COVID-19.

In addition, the outsourcing service provider in charge of receiving Spain visa applications, BLS, has announced the reopening of Spanish visa application centres in several countries of the world. The reopening of visa centres means that the reopening of borders for arrivals from these countries could happen in the near future.

Spanish borders are currently open for arrivals from other third countries – Australia, Israel, Rwanda, New Zealand, South Korea, Singapore, China, and Thailand.

Whereas, starting from June 7, all vaccinated travellers with one of the vaccines approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) can fly to Spain from any country.

Iceland

Iceland is that one Schengen Area country that has opened the borders the earliest for vaccinated travellers worldwide while at the same time keeping low the rates of COVID-19 new cases.

On April 6, Iceland started permitting entry for vaccinated travellers from anywhere in the world who have received one of the vaccines approved by the EMA. The authorities, at the same time, decided to permit entry for those who had recently recovered from the Coronavirus and could prove it.

Yet, the country took all the necessary measures not to become a transit point to the rest of the Schengen Area for foreign travellers.

At the same time, it kept tough restrictions in place, obliging to isolate in government facilities all arrivals from countries with high rates of Coronavirus cases, where a 14-day Coronavirus case notification rate surpasses 500 per 100,000.

However, SchengenVisaInfo.com announced on May 24 that Iceland would remove the entry ban and quarantine requirement for travellers from high-risk countries who have been vaccinated or recovered from the Coronavirus recently.

The latter decision has been taken at a time when the government of Iceland intends to vaccinate at least 60 per cent of its total population by June.

Germany

Germany remains among the EU countries with the slowest progress towards the reopening of the travel and tourism sector for foreign travellers.

One of the few steps that the German government has taken in this regard is to allow vaccinated travellers, as well as those who have fully recovered from the COVID-19, to skip testing and quarantine requirements when entering the country.

The rule, however, applies only to travellers who so far have been permitted to enter the country, under entry ban exemptions, or who are travellers from one of the other EU/Schengen Area countries with a low COVID-19 incidence and no virus mutations.

And, while Spain has decided to reopen its borders for arrivals from the UK completely restriction-free, Germany has added the UK to the list of high-risk countries where COVID-19 mutations have widely spread on May 23. The decision means that an entry ban is now imposed on travel and transport from the UK.

Italy

On May 16, Italy abolished an entry ban on vaccinated travellers from the Schengen Area and European Union Member States as well as from the United Kingdom and Israel. Yet, Italy kept in place the five-day quarantine requirement and testing against COVID-19 in place for travellers from these countries.

The decision followed a warning of the Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, who said that Italy would put into use its national green pass without waiting for the EU COVID-19 travel certificate.

Travellers from the United States and other non-European countries that are considered low risk, like Japan, Canada, Australia and Singapore, can also enter the country for non-essential purposes, but they still need both a Coronavirus test and a ten-day quarantine.

However, the country has announced its plans to permit travellers from the United States, Canada, and Japan to enter without being subject to any entry restrictions if they are fully vaccinated against the virus.

Just like some other European countries, like Spain and Greece, Italy’s economy also widely depends on international tourism, which pre-pandemic, in particular during the summer season, reached its peaks.

Data shows that the country has lost a total of €120.6 billion due to the Coronavirus restrictions on travel and tourism, which then caused a 51 per cent decrease in the contribution of the industry to Italy’s gross domestic product (GDP) in 2020.

Portugal

Portugal opened its borders for tourists from the other EU Member States, as well as the four non-EU Schengen area countries – Iceland, Lichtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland on May 17. Travellers from the former EU member, the United Kingdom, were also permitted to enter.

The authorities put in place an obligation to test for COVID-19 within 72 hours before arrival in Portugal for all travellers from these countries.

Switzerland

The non-EU Schengen Area country, Switzerland, is also reopening its borders through phases. It is expected that the country will decide on May 26, Wednesday, on a proposal of the Swiss Federal Council, which foresees permitting quarantine-free entry for travellers who are vaccinated against COVID-19.

At the end of April, Switzerland announced it was working on the development of a standardised counterfeit-proof and internationally recognised COVID-19 certificate. The authorities claimed at the time that the certificate will be available in time for summer and would serve to all persons vaccinated against the virus, as well as those who have recently recovered from the virus. Those who do not fit in the two categories previously mentioned would be able to enter by getting tested for COVID-19.

At the time, the authorities had noted that the Swiss certificate would be as flexible as possible in order that when further details are made known on the EU’s digital green certificate, it could be adjusted to meet the latter.

Denmark

Denmark is also gradually reopening its borders through phases. On May 1, the Danish government started the second phase of its reopening plan by allowing fully vaccinated travellers and children under 18 who are permanent residents in Denmark to travel to countries on the orange list.

Phase three of the gradual reopening of travel activities to and from Denmark, which started on May 14, saw the country relax its restrictions for countries and regions placed on the yellow list by exempting from the obligation of quarantine travellers coming from these parts of Europe.

The incidence limit for opening and closing the yellow and orange countries and areas in the EU and Schengen members has also been increased from 20/30 as it was before to 50/60 per every 100,000 residents in a period of seven days.

For now, arrivals to Denmark from an area in the EU/Schengen, placed in the orange list, are permitted to enter the country for non-essential purposes. Yet, they remain subject to self-isolation and testing obligation.

Exempt from these requirements are all those who are permitted to enter that can prove they have been vaccinated against COVID-19 or have recovered from the virus.

www.samigration.com

The Department of Home Affairs has committed to opening the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office (CTRRO) in ten months. This has been accepted by the Scalabrini Centre and others who took the matter of the office’s closure to court.

This comes as the department conceded that it was in breach of a Supreme Court of Appeal ruling that it needed to reopen the centre, and never did.

On Friday, the parties agreed to a recommendation by Western Cape High Court Acting Judge Alma De Wet that a case management system be put in place. This means that both parties will meet monthly and the department accounts for its progress in reopening the CTRRO.

The Legal Resource Centre (LRC) represented the Scalabrini Centre and the Somali Association of SA in court.

Western Cape regional director for the LRC Sherylle Dass said: “Home Affairs conceded that they were in breach of the SCA, Scalabrini order and that they failed to open up a fully functional Refugee Reception Office by the date that the court ordered.”

She added Home Affairs was making progress now: “During argument, the judge made a suggestion (of case management) Home Affairs has now filed a new lease agreement for new premises and they say by April next year they should be able to reopen.

While the LRC agreed to the terms set out by the court this matter has been ongoing since 2016 and Dass said they have their reservations: “We’ve argued that we don’t have any faith in DHA because they’ve gone through this lease agreement process before and the deal fell through.”

In a statement earlier this week, the Scalabrini Centre made it clear that they wanted a Special Master appointed to the case to ensure that Home Affairs complies with the court order. The statement reads: “DHA’s non-compliance has led the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, as applicants in the matter, to re-approach the Courts. We are seeking the appointment of a Special Master to oversee compliance to reopen the RRO.”

Dass said this would remain a legal avenue for the Scalabrini Centre should DHA not comply with the case management system agreed upon.

www.samigration.com

Ten South African diplomatic missions are set to be axed to save costs.

The South African government is expected to cut 10 of its diplomatic missions abroad, as a money-saving measure.

The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) is expected to announce the closures of foreign diplomatic missions soon. It is also likely to explain which ambassadors and other diplomats in nearby countries or cities will assume responsibility for diplomatic services in the countries or cities where it is closing missions.

The eight embassies to close are in Minsk in Belarus; Port of Spain in Trinidad and Tobago; the Holy See in the Vatican; Helsinki in Finland; Muscat in Oman; Suva in Fiji; Bucharest in Romania and Lima in Peru, sources said. 

Dirco also plans to close its consulates-general in Milan, Italy and in Chicago, US. South Africa still has consulates-general in New York and Los Angeles as well as the embassy in Washington. And it will retain its embassy in Rome. 

DA foreign affairs spokesperson Darren Bergman said the DA supported the trimming down of South Africa’s international Dirco footprint.

“But that means with those savings we should be able to offer better consular services in those countries via our main or neighbouring embassies. Anything less than this is a cop-out and goes against the constitutional right of South African citizens to consular services abroad.”

www.samigration.com