The Western Cape High Court in Cape Town has handed down a ruling that exposes systemic legal barriers facing Ukrainian asylum seekers looking for protection in South Africa.
In the case, a married Ukrainian couple and their minor child challenged the Director General of Home Affairs and the Minister of Home Affairs, arguing for judicial intervention in their asylum claims.
The family entered South Africa legally on tourist visas in September 2021. As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine escalated into a prolonged conflict, they applied for asylum, only to have their claims dismissed by Refugee Status Determination Officers as unfounded.
With their applications denied, they pursued an appeal before the Appeals Board Authority, which remains pending. Seeking judicial review, they contended that exhausting internal remedies, as required by the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA), would unnecessarily prolong their legal uncertainty.
Bureaucratic mandates versus immediate protection
In the ruling, Judge M Pangarker upheld the strict application of PAJA, stating that asylum seekers must complete internal processes before turning to the courts. The judge ruled that the applicants failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances that would justify an exemption, leading to the dismissal of their judicial review application.
While recognising the humanitarian crisis in Ukraine, the court determined that these circumstances did not override statutory procedural requirements governing asylum applications.
Although their case was dismissed, the court noted that the applicants retain temporary legal status in South Africa, shielding them from deportation under the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits returning individuals to unsafe conditions. While this legal safeguard prevents immediate removal, it does not resolve the uncertainty surrounding their asylum claims.
#Conviction
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel
