The future of South Africa’s immigration policy hangs in the balance as the public comment period for the Draft Revised White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration, and Refugee Protection officially closed today.
The proposed overhaul, which seeks to transform the country’s migration approach from a “mechanical compliance-based system” to one that acts as an economic enabler while safeguarding national security, has drawn significant attention from citizens and advocacy groups alike. The Department of Home Affairs had previously extended the deadline to ensure broader participation from the general public.
Speaking on the importance of the consultation process, a government spokesperson emphasized that public input was not merely procedural but essential to crafting effective policy.
“The reason why we took this to public consultation is because we are duty-bound as government to be able to consult members of the public, particularly South Africans, on any policy that is made,” the spokesperson said. “We are consulting because South Africans have got lived experiences where they’ve lived side by side with foreign nationals.”
The official acknowledged that the current legislative framework has presented significant challenges, particularly regarding asylum seekers. A 2017 Constitutional Court judgment allowed asylum seekers to work and study while their applications were processed, a decision the government admits has created unforeseen complications due to the absence of dedicated facilities.
“Obviously, there are certain instances where we have admitted as government that our Refugee Act has not actually done us any favor because it has created many problems for us,” the spokesperson explained. “We don’t have camps. When there was a case that was taken to court by an asylum seeker, the court allowed that the asylum seeker can work and the children can study on the basis that we do not have any safeguards for them because they have to integrate into communities.”
The official framed the current review as a necessary correction based on lessons learned from past legal battles, stating the goal is to determine “how do we then correct that moving forward.”
However, the spokesperson also levied sharp criticism at the government’s approach to constitutional interpretation and litigation, suggesting that executive branch officials have failed to adequately defend the national interest in court.
“You are the decision-makers, not the courts. But we find ourselves having a government that’s always responding to whatever is taken to court,” the official stated. “That’s because the type of lawyers and the type of arguments that you are bringing to the court are not echoing what the constitution says.”
The critique extended to the fundamental interpretation of constitutional rights. The spokesperson argued that the government’s own stance in legal proceedings has undermined its position.
“As lawmakers, as policymakers, you need to be the ones that guide that court what the policy is. But if the government is the same people that are telling us that ‘everyone’ in the constitution refers to every single person in the whole globe that lands in the country, then that’s where our problem starts.”
The official concluded by calling for alignment between constitutional provisions and legislative intent, stressing that a government committed to its citizens would take a more assertive role in shaping legal outcomes rather than merely reacting to them.
The Department of Home Affairs will now review the submissions received during the extended public comment period as it moves toward finalizing the revised framework.