ActionSA views with grave concern the new Department of Home Affairs directive instructing Refugee Reception Offices to accept asylum applications from undocumented persons, including those who entered South Africa illegally, entered outside designated ports of entry, possess no visa or failed to declare their intention to seek asylum upon entering the country.
While we recognise that the Department is implementing the Constitutional Court’s July 2026 Scalabrini judgment, ActionSA believes the practical consequences of this directive will be disastrous for South Africans if implemented through a broken asylum system that is already overwhelmed and a border-management system that remains severely constrained.
The Scalabrini judgment removed unlawful entry and related procedural failures as barriers to lodging an asylum application. The subsequent Home Affairs directive gives operational effect to that judgment by requiring Refugee Reception Offices to receive such applications and issue section 22 asylum-seeker visas once applications are lodged.
But access to an asylum process is not the same as refugee status. That distinction is now more important than ever.
ActionSA’s primary motive force is the South African citizen, and we believe government cannot, through this directive, permit a situation where already constrained public resources, employment opportunities, border security and communities are further affected, while potentially increasing the number of people entering an asylum system that is already bursting at the seams.
Of particular concern is what happens during the period between an asylum application being lodged and its final determination. South Africa cannot afford a system where undocumented persons enter the country, lodge asylum applications, acquire temporary legal status and are immediately dispersed into communities while an overwhelmed state potentially takes years to determine whether they genuinely qualify for international protection.
Once people become untraceable within communities, the State faces the further challenge of locating and repatriating those whose asylum claims are ultimately rejected. This is precisely the danger ActionSA sought to address in our February 2026 submission on the Revised White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection.
ActionSA proposed the establishment of Integration and Repatriation Centres (IRCs) near South Africa’s borders and at strategic inland hubs.
Under our proposal, asylum seekers would be accommodated for a limited period in these centres while their applications are processed. The centres would provide basic services and limited opportunities for self-sustaining activity while allowing the State to establish identity, undertake biometric registration, determine the applicant’s route into South Africa and adjudicate whether that person genuinely qualifies for refugee protection.
Only once status has been determined should the question of longer-term integration arise. For unsuccessful applicants, IRCs would provide a controlled point from which lawful repatriation can take place instead of government subsequently attempting to locate individuals who have disappeared into communities.
ActionSA further proposed strict processing timelines, asylum permits valid for no more than 12 months before reassessment, and traceable biometric identification linked to an intelligent population register to enable verification and prevent applicants from becoming untraceable.
We also proposed a Dual-Stream Processing System that distinguishes genuine refugees from economic migrants.
South Africa must remain a place of protection for people genuinely fleeing persecution. But unemployment, poverty and the desire for economic opportunity cannot, on their own, transform economic migration into refugee status.
This distinction must be made quickly, fairly and decisively.
ActionSA also supports the First Safe Country Principle, under which persons who have passed through safe third countries before reaching South Africa should ordinarily seek protection there, subject to South Africa’s constitutional and international obligations.
Significantly, Cabinet has itself now approved the First Safe Country Principle in the final Revised White Paper, alongside reforms aimed at strengthening refugee management and moving refugee processing closer to South Africa’s borders.
The question therefore arises: why should South Africa continue allowing asylum seekers to disperse into communities before their status has been determined when government’s own future policy direction recognises the need for earlier and more controlled refugee processing?
ActionSA further proposed capacity-linked asylum planning, including an annual national ceiling of 10,000 new asylum grants and refugee recognitions, linked to South Africa’s budget and absorption capacity and subject to parliamentary oversight.
South Africa cannot administer humanitarian obligations as though the resources of the State are infinite.
Every government policy operates within the reality of available resources. South Africa confronts enormous unemployment, poverty and pressure on housing, healthcare, education, policing and municipal services.
South African citizens cannot continually be expected to absorb the consequences of government’s failure to control the borders and administer immigration efficiently.
ActionSA therefore demands that the Minister of Home Affairs urgently disclose:
• How many additional asylum applications the Department anticipates following this directive;
• What additional financial and human resources have been allocated to process those applications;
• What maximum timeframe will apply to asylum determinations;
• How applicants will be biometrically registered, verified and tracked while their applications are pending;
• How government intends to distinguish genuine refugees from economic migrants attempting to use the asylum system as an alternative immigration pathway;
• How the First Safe Country Principle contained in government’s own Revised White Paper will ultimately interact with this new legal environment;
• What mechanisms will ensure that unsuccessful applicants are located and repatriated once all lawful processes have been exhausted; and
• Whether government will now establish controlled processing facilities at or near South Africa’s borders rather than continuing a system of immediate dispersal into communities.
ActionSA does not accept the false choice between compassion and sovereignty. South Africa can protect genuine refugees and secure its borders. We can respect international law and put South Africans first.
We can treat asylum seekers humanely without surrendering control over who enters, remains and ultimately integrates into our country.
The Constitutional Court has determined that unlawful entry cannot, by itself, close the door to an asylum application. Government must comply with that judgment.
But government still has a responsibility to determine what happens after that door is opened.
ActionSA’s position remains: Secure the border. Process before integration. Apply the First Safe Country Principle. Verify identity and biometrics. Separate genuine asylum from economic migration. Determine claims quickly. Protect genuine refugees. Immediately deport those who do not qualify.
ActionSA Warns New Asylum Seeker Directive Risks Deepening South Africa’s Immigration Crisis
ActionSA views with grave concern the new Department of Home Affairs directive instructing Refugee Reception Offices to accept asylum applications from undocumented persons, including those who entered South Africa illegally, entered outside designated ports of entry, possess no visa or failed to declare their intention to seek asylum upon entering the country.
While we recognise that the Department is implementing the Constitutional Court’s July 2026 Scalabrini judgment, ActionSA believes the practical consequences of this directive will be disastrous for South Africans if implemented through a broken asylum system that is already overwhelmed and a border-management system that remains severely constrained.
The Scalabrini judgment removed unlawful entry and related procedural failures as barriers to lodging an asylum application. The subsequent Home Affairs directive gives operational effect to that judgment by requiring Refugee Reception Offices to receive such applications and issue section 22 asylum-seeker visas once applications are lodged.
But access to an asylum process is not the same as refugee status. That distinction is now more important than ever.
ActionSA’s primary motive force is the South African citizen, and we believe government cannot, through this directive, permit a situation where already constrained public resources, employment opportunities, border security and communities are further affected, while potentially increasing the number of people entering an asylum system that is already bursting at the seams.
Of particular concern is what happens during the period between an asylum application being lodged and its final determination. South Africa cannot afford a system where undocumented persons enter the country, lodge asylum applications, acquire temporary legal status and are immediately dispersed into communities while an overwhelmed state potentially takes years to determine whether they genuinely qualify for international protection.
Once people become untraceable within communities, the State faces the further challenge of locating and repatriating those whose asylum claims are ultimately rejected. This is precisely the danger ActionSA sought to address in our February 2026 submission on the Revised White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection.
ActionSA proposed the establishment of Integration and Repatriation Centres (IRCs) near South Africa’s borders and at strategic inland hubs.
Under our proposal, asylum seekers would be accommodated for a limited period in these centres while their applications are processed. The centres would provide basic services and limited opportunities for self-sustaining activity while allowing the State to establish identity, undertake biometric registration, determine the applicant’s route into South Africa and adjudicate whether that person genuinely qualifies for refugee protection.
Only once status has been determined should the question of longer-term integration arise. For unsuccessful applicants, IRCs would provide a controlled point from which lawful repatriation can take place instead of government subsequently attempting to locate individuals who have disappeared into communities.
ActionSA further proposed strict processing timelines, asylum permits valid for no more than 12 months before reassessment, and traceable biometric identification linked to an intelligent population register to enable verification and prevent applicants from becoming untraceable.
We also proposed a Dual-Stream Processing System that distinguishes genuine refugees from economic migrants.
South Africa must remain a place of protection for people genuinely fleeing persecution. But unemployment, poverty and the desire for economic opportunity cannot, on their own, transform economic migration into refugee status.
This distinction must be made quickly, fairly and decisively.
ActionSA also supports the First Safe Country Principle, under which persons who have passed through safe third countries before reaching South Africa should ordinarily seek protection there, subject to South Africa’s constitutional and international obligations.
Significantly, Cabinet has itself now approved the First Safe Country Principle in the final Revised White Paper, alongside reforms aimed at strengthening refugee management and moving refugee processing closer to South Africa’s borders.
The question therefore arises: why should South Africa continue allowing asylum seekers to disperse into communities before their status has been determined when government’s own future policy direction recognises the need for earlier and more controlled refugee processing?
ActionSA further proposed capacity-linked asylum planning, including an annual national ceiling of 10,000 new asylum grants and refugee recognitions, linked to South Africa’s budget and absorption capacity and subject to parliamentary oversight.
South Africa cannot administer humanitarian obligations as though the resources of the State are infinite.
Every government policy operates within the reality of available resources. South Africa confronts enormous unemployment, poverty and pressure on housing, healthcare, education, policing and municipal services.
South African citizens cannot continually be expected to absorb the consequences of government’s failure to control the borders and administer immigration efficiently.
ActionSA therefore demands that the Minister of Home Affairs urgently disclose:
• How many additional asylum applications the Department anticipates following this directive;
• What additional financial and human resources have been allocated to process those applications;
• What maximum timeframe will apply to asylum determinations;
• How applicants will be biometrically registered, verified and tracked while their applications are pending;
• How government intends to distinguish genuine refugees from economic migrants attempting to use the asylum system as an alternative immigration pathway;
• How the First Safe Country Principle contained in government’s own Revised White Paper will ultimately interact with this new legal environment;
• What mechanisms will ensure that unsuccessful applicants are located and repatriated once all lawful processes have been exhausted; and
• Whether government will now establish controlled processing facilities at or near South Africa’s borders rather than continuing a system of immediate dispersal into communities.
ActionSA does not accept the false choice between compassion and sovereignty. South Africa can protect genuine refugees and secure its borders. We can respect international law and put South Africans first.
We can treat asylum seekers humanely without surrendering control over who enters, remains and ultimately integrates into our country.
The Constitutional Court has determined that unlawful entry cannot, by itself, close the door to an asylum application. Government must comply with that judgment.
But government still has a responsibility to determine what happens after that door is opened.
ActionSA’s position remains: Secure the border. Process before integration. Apply the First Safe Country Principle. Verify identity and biometrics. Separate genuine asylum from economic migration. Determine claims quickly. Protect genuine refugees. Immediately deport those who do not qualify.