DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Travel agencies in countries across the Middle East and Africa say the United Arab Emirates has temporarily halted issuing new visas to their citizens, a so-far unexplained ban on visitors amid both the coronavirus pandemic and the UAE's normalization deal with Israel.

Confusion over the UAE visa ban targeting 11 Muslim-majority nations, in addition to Lebanon and Kenya, swirled after a leaked document from Dubai’s state-owned airport free zone surfaced this week, declaring restrictions against a range of nationalities.

Emirati authorities have not acknowledged the suspension that comes as the UAE welcomes Israeli tourists for the first time in history, the coronavirus pandemic surges across the region and those searching for work in the federation of seven sheikhdoms increasingly overstay their tourist visas amid a cascade of business shutdowns and lay-offs.

Citing an order from the country’s immigration authorities, the note to companies operating in Dubai’s airport free zone announced a pause in issuing all new employment, long and short-term visit visas “until further notice” from countries including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iraq and Tunisia, without offering a reason. Those already holding visas would not be affected, it said.

The revelation has gripped social media feeds and news outlets worldwide, underscoring the UAE's global status as magnet for expat workers and visitors who outnumber locals nearly nine to one in the country.

When asked by The Associated Press about the order, the country's immigration department said it’s “not aware of any formal list of nationalities requiring visa suspension.” Dubai’s airport free zone confirmed the veracity of the document to the AP and said it was waiting for further clarification from officials.

Meanwhile, across the region, agencies and authorities say their citizens are forbidden from entering the UAE.

Travel agents in Pakistan said the UAE has barred single men under the age of 50 from the country, although those traveling with family can still obtain visas. Last week, Pakistan’s foreign office said it had “learnt that the UAE has temporarily suspended the issuance of new visit visas” in a move “believed to be related to the second wave of COVID-19.”

Bestways Travel company south of Islamabad was skeptical. “With such specific age and gender limits, obviously this has nothing to do with the coronavirus,” agent Jamchit Agha said. He said it was more likely tied to security concerns, or fears about young men overstaying visas to find jobs in Dubai, the region's financial hub. Dubai relies on millions of low-paid expat workers from Southeast Asia.

Several travel companies across Afghanistan also claimed the UAE had stopped issuing visas to citizens, without offering any explanation.

In Kenya, speculation has spread that the country landed on the UAE's blacklist over a spate of fake certificates showing negative results on coronavirus tests used to travel to the UAE, resulting in 21 arrests Thursday. Four travel agencies in the capital Nairobi said they were seeking clarification from Emirati authorities after dozens of tourist visas were rejected. Travel Shore Africa, one of the agencies, said 40 of its clients bound for Dubai had been blocked from boarding their flight last-minute on Thursday.

Two travel agents in Lebanon, a country that has sent legions of skilled workers to the UAE as its own economy plunged, confirmed visa applications were currently on hold except for those with a foreign passport or residency in a third country. Both companies have stopped issuing visas until they receive clear instructions.

Travel agents in Damascus have struggled over the past two weeks to understand why Syria had been removed from a list of countries eligible to apply for visas online. One agent assumed the omission was a technical glitch until a colleague told him that authorities had also stopped issuing visas to Syrians.

Iraqi Foreign Ministry spokesman Ahmed al-Sahaf said Iraq has not been officially informed of an Emirati travel ban against its citizens, but the country was aware of the reported blacklist and is following up through diplomatic channels. An employee at Dubai's budget airline, FlyDubai, in Baghdad said the company was taking far fewer visa applications, pending instructions expected next week.

Saeed Mohammed, an agent at Arabian Nights Tours in Dubai, said he frequently faces difficulties obtaining UAE entry visas for Iranians, Turkish citizens and those from Yemen's rebel-held capital due to simmering political tensions. The UAE's recent normalization deal with Israel, which now allows Israelis to visit the emirate's skyscraper-studded cities visa-free, has cast a spotlight on a changing Middle East. Gulf leaders have come to see Israel, a former enemy, as a key ally against the shared threats of Iran and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Despite long-standing visa troubles, Mohammed said he's never seen the 100% visa rejection rate of the past week, with some dozen visitor visas denied each day from Yemen, Iran, Turkey, Afghanistan and other countries.

“We can only assume that there has been some change in the law, but in reality, no one knows," he said.

Mohammad Hosseini, Iran’s Chargé d’Affaires in the UAE, wrote on Twitter Thursday that he's following up with the Emirati Foreign Ministry after hearing the visa ban applies to 13 countries “temporarily and until further notice." A travel agent in Tehran said Iranians hadn’t received visas to enter the UAE since early August.

One travel agent in Istanbul said she wasn't at all surprised by the ban, especially given the UAE's growing trend of rejecting Turkish visas over the past few months — the result of a political rivalry, not the coronavirus, she added.

www.samigration.com

Officials fear widespread chaos when smaller vehicles start arriving at the border

BULAWAYO – Home affairs minister Kazembe Kazembe met with his South African counterpart Aaron Motsoaledi in Beitbridge on Friday ahead of the re-opening of the border to normal traffic on December 1.

The border, southern Africa’s busiest port, has been closed to visitors on both side except for cargo and returning residents since both countries imposed lockdowns in March to control the spread of Covid-19.

Ahead of the Christmas and New Year’s holidays, both countries are preparing to open the border on December 1 – but immigration officials fear being overwhelmed, with virus screening measures set to extend the clearance times for both passengers and goods.

South African home affairs officials said discussions between the two men centred on resolving the current truck congestion at the border, with queues of up to 10 kilometers forming on busy days.

Officials fear widespread chaos when smaller vehicles start arriving at the border as tens of thousands of Zimbabweans return home for the holidays.

The truck congestion has been blamed on an insistence by Zimbabwean customs officials to search all haulage trucks item-by-item in a bid to tackle smuggling and increase revenue collection.

Truck drivers now spend several days in queues at the border, rendering their Covid-19 clearance certificates obtained 48-hours prior to travel – a requirement by Zimbabwe – invalid. Zimbabwe charges US$60 for a re-test on arrival

www.samigration.com

Mauritius’s borders will effectively remain closed for leisure travel during the peak December- January period, following its government’s decision to extend quarantine regulations until January 15, 2021. The move is another blow to outbound agents and operators who are missing out on December holiday bookings to South Africa’s favourite island destination.

TAG’s Jonathan Gerber, told Tourism Update that South African travellers did not have an appetite to visit Mauritius while the 14-day quarantine requirement remained in place and that this meant that the island’s borders were effectively still closed to short-term leisure visitors.

Mauritius’s regulations require travellers to self-isolate in a hotel room for 14 days before they may visit the various beaches and resorts on the island. Guests are not allowed to leave their rooms and are provided with meals, hygiene and sanitary equipment, which are delivered to the doors during quarantine. The average South African leisure-based stay in Mauritius ranges from seven to 10 days.

“The quarantine regulations have made a massive difference to what we sell, as Mauritius has always been one of our top destinations,” said Gerber. “It is astounding how governments have chosen to react to this virus. While we understand that it is important for government policies in a country like Mauritius to be cautious – where self-isolation is difficult due to the dense housing conditions in its villages – it does not make sense why travellers, who are able to provide negative PCR tests proving that they do not carry the virus, must quarantine for 14 days.”

He added that while TAG’s Mauritius specialist brand, Beachtag, had not yet reopened its doors, its team had been kept busy selling packages (but with reduced numbers) to other island destinations through TAG’s Hashtag brand.

MD of World Leisure Holidays, Ramesh Jeenarain, said while the quarantine extension was not good news, it had been anticipated. He explained that the decision had most likely been made due to the surge in infection rates in Europe, which were primary source markets for Mauritius. He was hopeful that infection rates would have decreased, and that some movement with vaccination distribution would motivate an easing in quarantine regulations by January 15. “This may still allow us to salvage the last few weeks of the January school holidays,” said Jeenarain.

CEO of Thompsons Holidays, Joanne Adolphe, said it had also anticipated that quarantine restrictions would not be over any time soon. Thompsons has been promoting sales to Mauritius from June 2021 onwards and has been actively promoting beach destinations, such as Zanzibar, Seychelles, Maldives, Dubai, Madagascar, Mombasa and Mozambique, in the interim.

“We have been in close contact with our ground handler in Mauritius and have taken the stance that we don’t want to take clients’ money for short-term gain if it seems unrealistic that a trip will go ahead. We understand that the Mauritius government has implemented its quarantine regulations for the health and security of both the Mauritian nationals and our passengers and we have to trust that they are doing the right thing for their country,” said Adolphe.

Andrew Stark, MD MEA of FCTG, said Flight Centre Travel Group had been promoting Mauritius for travel during the 2021 Easter and July school holidays. Flight Centre forecasts that there will be some sort of confirmed flight schedule in and out of Mauritius, and an easing in restrictions, by that point. “One destination’s demise is another’s rise,” commented Stark, adding that Zanzibar had been lapping up Mauritian demand for December.

Carla da Silva, Air Mauritius regional manager Southern Africa and Latin America, said she remained hopeful that Mauritian borders would reopen next year

www.samigration.com

The Supreme Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the minister of home affairs, who was ordered by the high court in Pretoria last year to grant citizenship to two brothers born in SA of foreign parents in the 1990s.

Brothers Joseph Emmanuel Jose and Jonathan Diabaka are entitled to South African citizenship even though their parents are Angolan.

This follows a ruling of the Supreme Court of Appeal on Tuesday, when it dismissed, with a punitive cost order, an application by the home affairs minister for leave to appeal against a court order that he grant citizenship to the two men, who were born in SA of foreign parents.

Joseph and Jonathan, born in SA in February 1996 and August 1997 respectively, have lived in the country their entire lives. Their parents are Angolan citizens who fled that country in 1995 and sought asylum in SA. The parents and children were granted refugee status in 1997.

This endured until January 2014 when the department informed the family that their refugee status had been withdrawn. When the status was withdrawn, Jose was 17 and Jonathan 16.

The department referred them to the Angolan embassy, where they were advised that to remain lawfully in SA, they had to apply for Angolan passports and failure to do that would result in “repatriation”.

The brothers have never been to Angola, they have no family there, know little about Angola, and neither speak any Portuguese.

When they experienced difficulties in applying for South African IDs, they approached Lawyers for Human Rights who advised them that they were eligible to apply for citizenship.

However, their efforts were not successful and they then applied to the high court in Pretoria to direct the department to grant them South African citizenship.

The court ordered the department to grant them citizenship in March last year.

Dissatisfied with this order, the minister applied for leave to appeal to the SCA.

The high court granted leave only on the question of whether it was competent for the court to order the minister to grant, as opposed to consider, the brothers' applications for citizenship.

In the judgment passed on Wednesday, the SCA held that the brothers met the requirements for South African citizenship in terms of the Citizenship Act.

This is because they were born in SA of parents who are not South African and who have not been admitted into SA for permanent residence and that they have lived in SA from the date of birth until they became adult.

On the question of whether a court can direct the department to grant the men's application for citizenship, the SCA said while the doctrine of the separation of powers must be considered, this did not mean that there might not be cases in which a court may need to give directions to the executive.

The SCA said given that it was clear that the men met all requirements for citizenship, it would serve no purpose to send the matter to the minister to make a fresh decision.

The SCA said a recent Constitutional Court judgment passed in July, which sets a precedent, affirmed that a court may direct the department to grant citizenship to an applicant.

The appellate court said though the precedent was set after the heads of argument -setting out the basis for the minister's appeal - were filed, the department's position ought to have changed.

The court said the department was obliged to reconsider its position.

For that reason, the SCA dismissed the minister's appeal with costs on a punitive scale.

www.samigration.com

The Supreme Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the minister of home affairs, who was ordered by the high court in Pretoria last year to grant citizenship to two brothers born in SA of foreign parents in the 1990s.

Brothers Joseph Emmanuel Jose and Jonathan Diabaka are entitled to South African citizenship even though their parents are Angolan.

This follows a ruling of the Supreme Court of Appeal on Tuesday, when it dismissed, with a punitive cost order, an application by the home affairs minister for leave to appeal against a court order that he grant citizenship to the two men, who were born in SA of foreign parents.

Joseph and Jonathan, born in SA in February 1996 and August 1997 respectively, have lived in the country their entire lives. Their parents are Angolan citizens who fled that country in 1995 and sought asylum in SA. The parents and children were granted refugee status in 1997.

This endured until January 2014 when the department informed the family that their refugee status had been withdrawn. When the status was withdrawn, Jose was 17 and Jonathan 16.

The department referred them to the Angolan embassy, where they were advised that to remain lawfully in SA, they had to apply for Angolan passports and failure to do that would result in “repatriation”.

The brothers have never been to Angola, they have no family there, know little about Angola, and neither speak any Portuguese.

When they experienced difficulties in applying for South African IDs, they approached Lawyers for Human Rights who advised them that they were eligible to apply for citizenship.

However, their efforts were not successful and they then applied to the high court in Pretoria to direct the department to grant them South African citizenship.

The court ordered the department to grant them citizenship in March last year.

Dissatisfied with this order, the minister applied for leave to appeal to the SCA.

The high court granted leave only on the question of whether it was competent for the court to order the minister to grant, as opposed to consider, the brothers' applications for citizenship.

In the judgment passed on Wednesday, the SCA held that the brothers met the requirements for South African citizenship in terms of the Citizenship Act.

This is because they were born in SA of parents who are not South African and who have not been admitted into SA for permanent residence and that they have lived in SA from the date of birth until they became adult.

On the question of whether a court can direct the department to grant the men's application for citizenship, the SCA said while the doctrine of the separation of powers must be considered, this did not mean that there might not be cases in which a court may need to give directions to the executive.

The SCA said given that it was clear that the men met all requirements for citizenship, it would serve no purpose to send the matter to the minister to make a fresh decision.

The SCA said a recent Constitutional Court judgment passed in July, which sets a precedent, affirmed that a court may direct the department to grant citizenship to an applicant.

The appellate court said though the precedent was set after the heads of argument -setting out the basis for the minister's appeal - were filed, the department's position ought to have changed.

The court said the department was obliged to reconsider its position.

For that reason, the SCA dismissed the minister's appeal with costs on a punitive scale.

www.samigration.com