Home affairs refused the Afghans entry into South Africa despite a court order that the government should grant them permission to seek asylum. It was issued after a US NGO argued the group might be victimised by the Taliban.
The department, which said it was notified of the pending court proceedings after the fact, challenged the order.
Qoza said on February 15, home affairs received a letter from attorneys representing the people. It demanded asylum transit visas be issued to them at the Beitbridge port of entry.
“While DHA was preparing a response to the letter, on February 16, a group of 22 Afghanistan nationals in the company of American citizens arrived at the Beitbridge port of entry and requested to be issued with asylum transit visas in order for them to enter the Republic of South Africa to apply for asylum. The immigration officer refused to do so as they were all issued with multiple-entry tourist visas by the government of the Republic of Zimbabwe on January 20,” he said.
The lawyers representing the Afghans approached the court on an urgent basis (in the absence of the DHA) and the court granted the interim order allowing them to be issued with asylum transit visas, Qoza said.
“The court, however, allowed the DHA to anticipate the interim order within 24 hours. The DHA did exactly that and the court refused to confirm the interim order to allow the DHA to file answering papers. The matter was heard by the court on February 20 2023. Judgment was reserved.”
Reacting to the court's first ruling, home affairs minister Aaron Motsoaledi said his office did not think this was a case of asylum seekers or refugees, but a move by the US NGO to undermine SA’s sovereignty.
TimesLIVE
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.
Afghans ‘fleeing the Taliban’ allowed into South Africa as asylum seekers
Image: Trevor Samson
A Pretoria high court order to grant 22 Afghans fleeing the Taliban access to South Africa on asylum transit visas will stand.
The department of home affairs (DHA) has confirmed that Tuesday's judgment is final.
“The DHA will abide by the ruling of the court and take all necessary steps to give effect to the ruling,” said department spokesperson Siya Qoza.
“The DHA will deal with the asylum applications during the asylum process.
“The decision to abide shows the DHA respects the rule of law. However, this should not be interpreted as opening floodgates for spurious asylum claims.
“The DHA will not hesitate to fight the cases in court, as it has done in this instance.”
Home affairs in court fight to block 22 Afghan nationals ‘fleeing the Taliban’ entry into SA
Home affairs refused the Afghans entry into South Africa despite a court order that the government should grant them permission to seek asylum. It was issued after a US NGO argued the group might be victimised by the Taliban.
The department, which said it was notified of the pending court proceedings after the fact, challenged the order.
Qoza said on February 15, home affairs received a letter from attorneys representing the people. It demanded asylum transit visas be issued to them at the Beitbridge port of entry.
“While DHA was preparing a response to the letter, on February 16, a group of 22 Afghanistan nationals in the company of American citizens arrived at the Beitbridge port of entry and requested to be issued with asylum transit visas in order for them to enter the Republic of South Africa to apply for asylum. The immigration officer refused to do so as they were all issued with multiple-entry tourist visas by the government of the Republic of Zimbabwe on January 20,” he said.
The lawyers representing the Afghans approached the court on an urgent basis (in the absence of the DHA) and the court granted the interim order allowing them to be issued with asylum transit visas, Qoza said.
“The court, however, allowed the DHA to anticipate the interim order within 24 hours. The DHA did exactly that and the court refused to confirm the interim order to allow the DHA to file answering papers. The matter was heard by the court on February 20 2023. Judgment was reserved.”
Reacting to the court's first ruling, home affairs minister Aaron Motsoaledi said his office did not think this was a case of asylum seekers or refugees, but a move by the US NGO to undermine SA’s sovereignty.
TimesLIVE
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.
READ MORE:
'Our system is being abused’ — Clayson Monyela on Afghan asylum seekers debacle
Zimbabwean exemption permits: SA expulsions will be 'disaster'
Alleged kidnap kingpin challenged to explain passport discrepancies
Nothing the US has warned about has come to fruition: Naledi Pandor
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
News and promos in your inbox
subscribeMost read
Latest Videos