Kathrada Foundation backs Landmark ConCourt ruling on asylum seekers, warns against xenophobia

On 7 July, the Constitutional Court declared certain provisions of the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 unconstitutional and invalid. The Ahmed Kathrada Foundation has welcomed a landmark Constitutional Court of South Africa judgment that struck down several provisions of the Refugees Act, describing the ruling as a victory for human dignity, human rights, and the rule of law. On 7 July, the Constitutional Court declared certain provisions of the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 unconstitutional and invalid. Court ruling It found that certain asylum-seeker provisions were unconstitutional, removing administrative barriers that previously prevented some vulnerable individuals from applying for protection in South Africa. The directive, signed on 29 September and implemented in response to the Constitutional Court ruling, instructed refugee centres to accept applications from anyone seeking asylum. According to the Kathrada Foundation, asylum seekers who entered the country through unofficial border posts, missed reporting deadlines, or lacked specific transit visas could previously be blocked from applying for asylum unless they passed a “good cause” interview. The court has now ruled those requirements unconstitutional. People cannot be denied The foundation said the ruling ensures procedural errors or border-crossing technicalities cannot deny people the opportunity to have their asylum claims properly assessed before deportation decisions are made. In a strongly worded statement, the foundation’s executive director, Neeshan Balton, said the judgment reflects the values championed by Ahmed Kathrada. “Uncle Kathy spent his life fighting for a South Africa rooted in equality, justice, and absolute respect for human rights. He often reminded us that our freedom is incomplete without the recognition of the shared humanity of all people, including those fleeing war and tyranny.” Concern Balton also voiced concern about political criticism directed at the judiciary and the Department of Home Affairs following the ruling. “Short-sighted attempts to undermine the integrity of our apex court for cheap political points pose a dangerous threat to the rule of law and constitutional democracy itself.” Asylum seekers While acknowledging concerns about the department’s administrative capacity, Balton stressed that protecting asylum seekers’ constitutional rights does not amount to uncontrolled migration. “Upholding constitutional protections for asylum seekers does not equate to uncontrolled migration, nor does it diminish South Africa’s sovereign right to regulate immigration lawfully.” Violence The Ahmed Kathrada Foundation called on political parties, civic organisations, and communities to respect the judgment and avoid rhetoric that fuels fear, xenophobia, or division, arguing that the ruling reinforces South Africa’s constitutional commitment to protecting vulnerable people. On Thursday, the Government’s immigration task team admitted unintended consequences following the Constitutional Court’s asylum seeker-related ruling. The interministerial committee (IMC) on migration responded to this week’s fresh wave of anti-illegal immigration sentiment by attempting to quell the belief that the ruling granted unlimited access to asylum seekers. “Applications that are fraudulent, abusive or do not meet the requirements of the Refugees Act will still be rejected through the established legal process,” said Justice and Constitutional Development Minister Mmamoloko Kubayi.