The High Court of South Africa's Western Cape Division has declared several provisions of the Refugees Act unconstitutional, marking a victory for asylum rights advocates led by the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, represented by Lawyers for Human Rights.
The case, brought against the Minister of Home Affairs and several government entities, challenged sections 4(1)(f), 4(1)(h), 4(1)(i), and regulation 8, arguing that they unfairly barred individuals with irregular immigration statuses from seeking asylum. The Scalabrini Centre contended that these provisions violated the South African Constitution and international non-refoulement principles, which prohibit the return of refugees to countries where they face persecution or harm.
Justice J Cloete, presiding alongside Justice L Nuku and Acting Justice S Kholong, ruled that these regulations unjustly penalised individuals for bureaucratic infractions, effectively blocking access to refugee protections. The principle of non-refoulement, enshrined both in South African and international law, was central to the court’s findings.
In a crucial argument, human rights organisations, including Amnesty International and the Helen Suzman Foundation, serving as amici curiae (friends of the court), highlighted that the provisions disproportionately affected children, forcing them into uncertain legal circumstances and increasing their vulnerability to deportation.
The judgment stressed that provisions failing to protect the best interests of children and ensure fair asylum access must align with constitutional imperatives. Consequently, the South African government has been ordered to review these policies and draft new regulations that safeguard asylum seekers' rights while balancing immigration enforcement.
#Conviction
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel
