IMCOSA Newsletter
Immigration Laws: Changes
Change in South Africa Immigration Laws One Step Further - 09 September 2011
The much-debated and –criticized amendments to the immigration laws are now one step closer to coming into effect. The Immigration Amendment Act, No 13 of 2011, was published on Friday, 26 August 2011 and is now law.
A number of points remain a major concern, including:
· Removal of section 46, which provides that advocates, attorneys and registered Immigration Practitioners may represent applicants before the Department of Home Affairs. The concern is that the removal of section 46 will lead to the legitimization of corrupt and unethical "consultants", taking away from foreigners the tool to differentiate bone fide practitioners from illegitimate ones, putting them at risk of being exploited and defrauded.
· Application in person: The proposed section will require all applications to be submitted in person, where applications can currently be lodged via courier or through attorneys, advocates and immigration practitioners or their staff. It is a common occurrence for counter staff at offices of Home Affairs and at foreign missions to give poor or incomplete advice. Furthermore, there are language and cultural hurdles to be overcome. Immigration Practitioners have been shouldering the negative and tedious parts of the immigration process for their clients in order to ensure that the latter's experience of moving to South Africa is a positive one, and we are now working on the various means of ensuring that the immigration process into South Africa remains as smooth and efficient as possible also under new legislation.
· Effective abolishment of exceptional skills permit and replacement of quota by the critical skills permit: South Africa will be losing an important tool to attract highly valuable individuals, we are however investigating best possible alternatives in general and on a case-to-case basis.
In terms of section 27 of the Amendment Act, this piece of legislation will come into effect on the day to be determined by the president and published in the government gazette. It is to be assumed that this will only be once the Immigration Regulations, which provide the detail of the law (including specific requirements and procedures) have been finalised. No draft of such Regulations has yet been made public, and rumour has it that not much work has been done on this up to now.
It may therefore take anything from two weeks to two years until the law becomes effective (the last amendments of 2005 have still not) and IMCOSA will keep you updated on the progress.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/149-immigration-laws-changes.html
Friday 30 September 2011
Thursday 29 September 2011
Home Affairs Update
IMCOSA August Newsletter
Home Affairs Update
The Department of Home Affairs’ backlog, as far as IMCOSA’s submissions are concerned, has been largely cleared. The general processing time for temporary residence applications submitted within South Africa is currently 3-4 months (plus minus a month), provided that the application itself is unflawed and a tight follow-up process is applied.
Major problems are caused through the large number of applications going missing in the system, i.e. not being logged onto the Department’s electronic “track & trace” system correctly. Again, a complex set of steps has to be followed to ensure that these applications are processed and finalized correctly.
Another major headache is the large percentage of errors found in the permits that are being issued. Across the industry, the general consent seems to be that over 50% of permits are issued incorrectly, with errors ranging from incorrectly spelt names, wrong employer names being inserted, incorrect categories of permits being used, permit types being confused amongst family members (e.g. the father receives a study permit, whilst the 5-year-old daughter receives a permit to work as the CEO of company XYZ), permits being given incorrect validity periods, etc. We are finding that the process to rectify these errors regularly takes significantly longer than the original applications.
A serious concern is the fact that in early July 300 contract staff who had been assisting with the permitting process at the Department of Home Affairs’ head office, were released from their duties at once, presumably because their contracts ended. Due to this sudden and enormous drop in capacity, substantial backlogs are expected to build up in the coming weeks and months.
For the moment, the process has however become more predictable and the situation has somewhat stabilized, but whether this trend continues remains to be seen.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Home Affairs Update
The Department of Home Affairs’ backlog, as far as IMCOSA’s submissions are concerned, has been largely cleared. The general processing time for temporary residence applications submitted within South Africa is currently 3-4 months (plus minus a month), provided that the application itself is unflawed and a tight follow-up process is applied.
Major problems are caused through the large number of applications going missing in the system, i.e. not being logged onto the Department’s electronic “track & trace” system correctly. Again, a complex set of steps has to be followed to ensure that these applications are processed and finalized correctly.
Another major headache is the large percentage of errors found in the permits that are being issued. Across the industry, the general consent seems to be that over 50% of permits are issued incorrectly, with errors ranging from incorrectly spelt names, wrong employer names being inserted, incorrect categories of permits being used, permit types being confused amongst family members (e.g. the father receives a study permit, whilst the 5-year-old daughter receives a permit to work as the CEO of company XYZ), permits being given incorrect validity periods, etc. We are finding that the process to rectify these errors regularly takes significantly longer than the original applications.
A serious concern is the fact that in early July 300 contract staff who had been assisting with the permitting process at the Department of Home Affairs’ head office, were released from their duties at once, presumably because their contracts ended. Due to this sudden and enormous drop in capacity, substantial backlogs are expected to build up in the coming weeks and months.
For the moment, the process has however become more predictable and the situation has somewhat stabilized, but whether this trend continues remains to be seen.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Wednesday 28 September 2011
Immigration Amendment Bill: Update
IMCOSA August Newsletter
Immigration Amendment Bill 2010
The Immigration Amendment Bill of 2010 has been submitted to parliament in its final version, which has not changed in any of the points that we commented on in our last newsletter. To date, it has not been signed into law. In order to be implemented, intricate Regulations have to be drawn up initially, which will prescribe the detail of the law and provide insight into how the new rules are to be interpreted.
The portfolio committee hearings regarding the Bill are over and the industry is now in a waiting position as to when and how information regarding the Regulations will be made public. It is not expected that any wider consultation with the public will take place.
The following points remain a major concern, amongst others:
· Removal of section 46, which provides that advocates, attorneys and registered Immigration Practitioners may represent applicants before the Department of Home Affairs. The concern is that the removal of section 46 will lead to the legitimization of corrupt and unethical “consultants”, taking away from foreigners the tool to differentiate bone fide practitioners from illegitimate ones, putting them at risk of being exploited and defrauded.
· Application in person: The proposed section will require all applications to be submitted in person, where applications can currently be lodged via courier or through attorneys, advocates and immigration practitioners or their staff. It is a common occurrence for counter staff at offices of Home Affairs and at foreign missions to give poor or incomplete advice. Furthermore, there are language and cultural hurdles to be overcome. Immigration Practitioners have been shouldering the negative and tedious parts of the immigration process for their clients in order to ensure that the latter’s experience of moving to South Africa is a positive one, and we are now working on the various means of ensuring that the immigration process into South Africa remains as smooth and efficient as possible also under new legislation.
· Effective abolishment of exceptional skills permit and replacement of quota by the critical skills permit: South Africa will be losing an important tool to attract highly valuable individuals, we are however investigating best possible alternatives in general and on a case-to-case basis.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Immigration Amendment Bill 2010
The Immigration Amendment Bill of 2010 has been submitted to parliament in its final version, which has not changed in any of the points that we commented on in our last newsletter. To date, it has not been signed into law. In order to be implemented, intricate Regulations have to be drawn up initially, which will prescribe the detail of the law and provide insight into how the new rules are to be interpreted.
The portfolio committee hearings regarding the Bill are over and the industry is now in a waiting position as to when and how information regarding the Regulations will be made public. It is not expected that any wider consultation with the public will take place.
The following points remain a major concern, amongst others:
· Removal of section 46, which provides that advocates, attorneys and registered Immigration Practitioners may represent applicants before the Department of Home Affairs. The concern is that the removal of section 46 will lead to the legitimization of corrupt and unethical “consultants”, taking away from foreigners the tool to differentiate bone fide practitioners from illegitimate ones, putting them at risk of being exploited and defrauded.
· Application in person: The proposed section will require all applications to be submitted in person, where applications can currently be lodged via courier or through attorneys, advocates and immigration practitioners or their staff. It is a common occurrence for counter staff at offices of Home Affairs and at foreign missions to give poor or incomplete advice. Furthermore, there are language and cultural hurdles to be overcome. Immigration Practitioners have been shouldering the negative and tedious parts of the immigration process for their clients in order to ensure that the latter’s experience of moving to South Africa is a positive one, and we are now working on the various means of ensuring that the immigration process into South Africa remains as smooth and efficient as possible also under new legislation.
· Effective abolishment of exceptional skills permit and replacement of quota by the critical skills permit: South Africa will be losing an important tool to attract highly valuable individuals, we are however investigating best possible alternatives in general and on a case-to-case basis.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Tuesday 27 September 2011
Court action against Home Affairs: Update
IMCOSA August Newsletter
Court Action against Home Affairs
The court application against Home Affairs by a group of immigration companies on behalf of about 600 of their clients in a bid to press the Minister and Department to finalize long overdue applications, has lost much of its relevance to our clients, as all IMCOSA clients involved in this process have in the meantime received their permits. There are important benefits that a judgment in the form of a declaratory order could still yield (e.g. the right to start or continue working after 30 days of having waited for a result), and the matter is therefore still being pursued by us. The next hearing is expected to take place later in the year, and we will continue to serve our clients' best interests in any legal proceedings.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Court Action against Home Affairs
The court application against Home Affairs by a group of immigration companies on behalf of about 600 of their clients in a bid to press the Minister and Department to finalize long overdue applications, has lost much of its relevance to our clients, as all IMCOSA clients involved in this process have in the meantime received their permits. There are important benefits that a judgment in the form of a declaratory order could still yield (e.g. the right to start or continue working after 30 days of having waited for a result), and the matter is therefore still being pursued by us. The next hearing is expected to take place later in the year, and we will continue to serve our clients' best interests in any legal proceedings.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Monday 26 September 2011
FICA and Freezing of bank accounts
IMCOSA AUGUST NEWSLETTER
Fica and the Freezing of Bank Accounts
More and more foreigners with local bank accounts are experiencing problems when they apply for an extension or change of permit and do not receive their new permits before expiry of the original one. Certain banks have started, systematically and as a matter of policy, to freeze the bank accounts of foreigners on the day that their permits expire. The freezing is done irrespective of whether applications for extensions have been made to Home Affairs, and whether such applications were made well in advance of the expiry date. No intervention has been found to stop or reverse this and letters issued by the regional office of Home Affairs acknowledging responsibility for the delay, or even written support by the Banking Council, have fallen on deaf ears.
The effect of this is that law-abiding persons, apart from having to endure the stress of their new permits not arriving in time and them not being allowed to continue their work or other activity, now have the added pleasure of not being able to access their own funds, of debit orders not being processed, etc.
Fortunately, there are alternatives to this scenario and there are respectable banks who very well understand the problems caused by Home Affairs delays. The freezing of your bank account is therefore avoidable, provided that the necessary steps are taken in advance. Please approach our team if you have questions in this regard or require assistance.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Fica and the Freezing of Bank Accounts
More and more foreigners with local bank accounts are experiencing problems when they apply for an extension or change of permit and do not receive their new permits before expiry of the original one. Certain banks have started, systematically and as a matter of policy, to freeze the bank accounts of foreigners on the day that their permits expire. The freezing is done irrespective of whether applications for extensions have been made to Home Affairs, and whether such applications were made well in advance of the expiry date. No intervention has been found to stop or reverse this and letters issued by the regional office of Home Affairs acknowledging responsibility for the delay, or even written support by the Banking Council, have fallen on deaf ears.
The effect of this is that law-abiding persons, apart from having to endure the stress of their new permits not arriving in time and them not being allowed to continue their work or other activity, now have the added pleasure of not being able to access their own funds, of debit orders not being processed, etc.
Fortunately, there are alternatives to this scenario and there are respectable banks who very well understand the problems caused by Home Affairs delays. The freezing of your bank account is therefore avoidable, provided that the necessary steps are taken in advance. Please approach our team if you have questions in this regard or require assistance.
http://imcosa.co.za/en/news/147-immigration-news-aug-2011.html
Saturday 24 September 2011
home affairs refuses to marry gay couple (then apologises)
Wednesday, 31 August 2011
DA proves that it is a party for all South Africans – even gays
The Democratic Alliance has one again proved that it is a party for ALL South Africans. Earlier this week I wrote about a gay couple, Donovan and Michael from Port Elizabeth, who went to their local Home Affairs office to enquire about being married, only to be told that Home Affairs did not “do” same-sex marriages.
I immediately took up this case with DA shadow minister of Home Affairs, Hon Annette Lovemore MP. She was quick to respond and followed up the matter with the Home Affairs Department and alerted the Director-General to the matter. Home Affairs provincial manager Sonto Lusu yesterday personally apologised to the couple after the PE office illegally turned down their request to be married. Lusu, not only apologised, but also offered to immediately ensure they get married at Home Affairs. Due to the stress of their ordeal, the couple has informed me that they have decided to marry privately – even though it will come at a cost – rather than take advantage of the free service Home Affairs is supposed to provide.
The facts of the matter are that the Constitutional Court instructed parliament to develop appropriate legislation around same-sex marriages. This was done, and the Civil Union Act of 2006 was passed. South Africa recognises the right of same-sex couples to be married! The couple was told unequivocally that Home Affairs could not help them as it did not “do” gay marriages. The DA feels that this is utterly unacceptable. Why does the Department of Home Affairs even entertain the appointment of marriage officers who are not prepared to conduct civil unions? The men in question, and other gay couples like them, are in love, and they wish to show their commitment to each other by entering into a civil union. They have a constitutional right to do so.
On a side note, as a DA politician I will continue to represent the rights of ALL South African, even if some people are offended by this. Public representatives need to uphold all aspects of our constitution, as a constitution is like a fragile house of cards – if we start to allow some aspects to collapse the whole thing will fall.
http://lanceweyer.blogspot.com/2011/08/da-proves-that-it-is-party-for-all.html?spref=fb
Friday 23 September 2011
Home Affairs officials to be arrested for ignoring court ruling
Eyewitness News:
http://www.ewn.co.za/Story.aspx?Id=72800September 19, 2011
The North Gauteng High Court ordered the immediate arrest of two Home Affairs officials for contempt of court on Thursday.
The court heard that the Home Affairs legal department advised two of its officials to ignore a court order to appear before the judge.
Acting judge Johannes Kruger had ordered Klerksdorp Home Affairs Operational Manager Pieter Erasmus to appear before him to explain why he did not comply with a previous instruction. The same applied for immigration department head Malebo Matsane.
The two officials ignored the court's instruction to release immigrant Ali Ullar from detention on Tuesday.
http://www.eyewitnessnews.co.za/Story.aspx?Id=72800
Thursday 22 September 2011
Home Affairs Deals Decisively With Corruption
Cape Town — The Department of Home Affairs has received 78 cases of staff misconduct in the first quarter of the current financial year, and of that figure, 54 have been dealt with.
This comes as the department aims to ensure ethical conduct and a "zero tolerance approach to corruption."
In its quarterly report presented to Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on Tuesday, the department said they aimed to finalise 70 percent of misconduct cases within 60 days.
In a media briefing following the tabling of the report, Department Director General Mkuseli Apleni said they needed more human resources to win against corruption.
With the mechanisms they have put in place, he said they hoped to get an unqualified financial report from the Auditor-General.
In the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) of government's 12 priority outcomes, the department contributed three of the outlined outcomes.
These were ensuring the safety of all in the country; a skilled and capable workforce to support the New Growth Path and providing an "efficient, effective and development oriented public and inclusive citizenship."
Apleni said they had signed a performance agreement with President Jacob Zuma. The agreement, he said, included ensuring "effective and efficient refugee management strategies," registration of "every child within 30 days of birth" and issuing IDs to "every South African aged 16 and above."
He said that in this quarter, they had received 31 795 ID applications and 10 758 IDs had since been issued to matric learners, accounting for 33.8%.
On another issue, Apleni said they wanted to integrate key systems and upgrade IT infrastructure for improved security and data integrity.
To that end, the annual target was to have 67% of Ports of Entry (POE) equipped with Enhanced Movement Control System (EMCS).
However, Apleni said this quarter they had missed their target on EMCS as it was dependent on "the rationalisation of the ports of entry as well as the further enhancement of Movement Control System."
Some of the challenges faced by his department included improving asylum-seeker and refugee management, fighting human trafficking and smuggling, and establishing and maintaining consistent standards for security and service delivery.
This comes as the department aims to ensure ethical conduct and a "zero tolerance approach to corruption."
In its quarterly report presented to Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs on Tuesday, the department said they aimed to finalise 70 percent of misconduct cases within 60 days.
In a media briefing following the tabling of the report, Department Director General Mkuseli Apleni said they needed more human resources to win against corruption.
With the mechanisms they have put in place, he said they hoped to get an unqualified financial report from the Auditor-General.
In the Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) of government's 12 priority outcomes, the department contributed three of the outlined outcomes.
These were ensuring the safety of all in the country; a skilled and capable workforce to support the New Growth Path and providing an "efficient, effective and development oriented public and inclusive citizenship."
Apleni said they had signed a performance agreement with President Jacob Zuma. The agreement, he said, included ensuring "effective and efficient refugee management strategies," registration of "every child within 30 days of birth" and issuing IDs to "every South African aged 16 and above."
He said that in this quarter, they had received 31 795 ID applications and 10 758 IDs had since been issued to matric learners, accounting for 33.8%.
On another issue, Apleni said they wanted to integrate key systems and upgrade IT infrastructure for improved security and data integrity.
To that end, the annual target was to have 67% of Ports of Entry (POE) equipped with Enhanced Movement Control System (EMCS).
However, Apleni said this quarter they had missed their target on EMCS as it was dependent on "the rationalisation of the ports of entry as well as the further enhancement of Movement Control System."
Some of the challenges faced by his department included improving asylum-seeker and refugee management, fighting human trafficking and smuggling, and establishing and maintaining consistent standards for security and service delivery.
Wednesday 21 September 2011
Pastor at end of his tether over invalid IDs
Sep 19, 2011 | Alex Matlala
The pastor has been unable to get the department to correct mistakes in his identity document since 2004.
The pastor has been unable to get the department to correct mistakes in his identity document since 2004.
Pastor Sevha Cassias Shikweni, 40, from Xihoko village outside Tzaneen, applied for a new ID in 2004 after he lost his original book.
Shikweni has been applying for a new document every year since 2004 because the ID books contained either the wrong picture or name.
"Last year I was forced to register my car with my wife's ID book details because I could not prove my identity," said Shikweni, who currently has six different ID books.
Shikweni said his problems escalated in December 2007 when he wanted to open an account at a furniture shop in Tzaneen.
"I was baffled when the officials told me that my name was at the credit bureau and that I owed several shops money for clothes I had purchased on credit.
"When I went to Home Affairs in Tzaneen they always advised me to apply for a new ID but always came up with the same mistakes."
The provincial Home Affairs manager in Limpopo, Nthoriseng Motsitsi, said Shikweni needed an affidavit from the police stating he had lost his ID.
http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2011/09/19/pastor-at-end-of-his-tether-over-invalid-ids
Tuesday 20 September 2011
Serious about tackling corruption
Officials ‘hit in full view of public’
INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS
A convoy of Home Affairs and police vehicles rolled into the border post at just after 8am. Photo: Doctor Ngcobo
They hit them in full view of the public.
On Friday, 13 Home Affairs officials and six policemen were arrested in raids across Mpumalanga – handcuffed and arrested, while travellers and those wanting to cross the border watched. All were charged with corruption.
“They all co-operated and no one gave us problems,” said police spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Leonard Hlathi.
These were just the latest successes of Operation Mahlabandlovu.
In the early hours yesterday, police and Home Affairs officials gathered at the remote Tonga police station.
At 8am the operation got under way, with some investigators travelling as far as 200km to make their arrests.
One of the raids focused on the Lebombo Border Post on the Mozambique Border.
A convoy of Home Affairs and police vehicles rolled into the border post at just after 8am yesterday. To the surprise of everyone working at the post, the first woman to be arrested was processing passports.
She went quietly. Another woman burst into tears.
Those who had been waiting in her line had to find other queues. As in the case of others who were arrested, investigators seized her cellphone, documents and passports. Cars were also searched.
Investigators recovered several passports and fingerprint-capturing equipment – including ink pads and rollers – in the vehicle of one suspect.
Home Affairs director of investigative services Connie Moitse said yesterday at the scene officials were not supposed to have individuals’ passports in their vehicles.
Another suspect was found with a bundle of Pakistani passports.
Investigators suspect those they arrested yesterday were taking bribes from foreigners entering South Africa without proper entry visas.
It appears to be a lucrative source of income. One Home Affairs investigator said they made as much as R10 000 a day.
A total of 15 people were arrested at the border post. Over the past couple of years Lebombo has gained a reputation for corruption.
“Several of our staff were detained in an ongoing operation. This shows we are really serious about fighting corruption,” said Moitse.
The arrested Home Affairs officials were suspended from the department, pending an investigation. Those arrested will probably appear on corruption charges in the Komatipoort Magistrate’s Court on Monday.. - Saturday Star
http://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/mpumalanga/officials-hit-in-full-view-of-public-1.1126178
Monday 19 September 2011
Sexual favours for an ID
South Africa: Intomboxolo Nyendwana's Home Affairs Torment
Mandy De Waal
14 September 2011
analysis
Ntomboxolo Nyendwana has always dreamed of being a teacher, studying at college, and getting a paying job so she could create a better life for herself and her children. The 41-year-old seamstress currently exists on social grants and what she makes from sewing and selling pillows. She also does needle work and clothing repairs for cash.
"In 1991, I was studying Matric and went to Home Affairs to make my first application. After that I got a letter to say I didn't write my postal address (on the forms). I went back. They said I must apply again. They told me I must pay again. But when I went back they had scratched my ID number out and told me that my number was wrong," says Nyendwana.
The seamstress was contacted by Home Affairs once more, and they told her that her fingerprints on the documentation had changed. By this time Nyendwana had gone back and forth to Home Affairs many times, but it was only in 1993 when she was at the government offices that she was advised that she was one of two people with the same ID number.
"Home Affairs called me and said that there is a person posing as myself. Or I am posing as her. They said I must bring my birth certificate. By that time I was studying for a BA in Education and the university told me if I didn't get my ID sorted out I will be expelled. I wouldn't get my degree."
When Nyendwana went back to Home Affairs she was standing in a queue when a government official said he could help her. She says she knew this man as a child, and that he knew her family. The official told Nyendwana he had powerful connections in Pretoria that would quickly help resolve the mess. "I spoke to this man. He said he knew people where the IDs were made and that he would sort everything out if I slept with him. I was afraid and I was desperate. I didn't want to sleep with him, but I didn't want to be expelled."
"He said to me I must come with him. I followed him and he took me to the toilet and there he slept with me. He just gave me a toilet paper to wipe myself. After that we moved back to the queue. Instead of calling my name to help me he called someone else. I was so angry and frustrated with myself. I stood up, walked out and went home."
Feeling ashamed, Nyendwana never went back to Home Affairs for a while, even though 1994 brought democracy to South Africa and enabled her to vote for the first time. "I had to vote with a temporary ID because I had no ID book."
Eventually Nyendwana went back to Home Affairs where the same official told her she shouldn't have her photographs taken outside, but inside.
As she was having her photographs taken the official again asked her for sex, saying he would assist her with her ID process. "He kept asking me why I did not want to sleep with him again. I said I was asking other people to help me instead. I said to myself I would not sleep with him again. But I didn't get any help with my ID, so I did sleep with him again a second time. But it hurt me."
A year later in 1995, Nyendwana still had no ID book. She returned to Home Affairs where another official told her to go to her elders and slaughter a goat. "This person said there was so much darkness on me. I took it as an insult. Another lady working at Home Affairs asked me to bring her Coke. She said I was such a regular I was supposed to bring something for her." Each time Nyendwana returned to Home Affairs, the same official that she alleges was trading sex for favours, pestered her for sex.
In 1996, Nyendwana returned to Home Affairs demanding pen and paper. "I told them I am going to write a letter to Pretoria to state my case." Nyendwana wrote to Home Affairs in Pretoria but did not get a response.
In January 1997 she received her ID book in the post, but with the wrong ID number. "My other name is Patience. But in my book they wrote 'Patient' instead of Patience. I didn't want to go to Home Affairs again because I had suffered so much. I would keep this ID safe with me."
Nyendwana resumed her studies but in 2005 when she went to draw funds from her bank account which her social grant was paid into, she discovered her bank card was blocked. "The bank told me there was another person in Grahamstown who had my name, surname and a temporary ID with my number. They said she got my money. The bank said I had to go to Home Affairs to get them to do an investigation."
And so Nyendwana was forced to return to Home Affairs again, a place she says has brought her enormous hurt, shame, anger and frustration. "They gave me a letter for the bank. I asked them to look what is happening and on the computer they showed me this other person in Grahamstown with my name and ID. They said her children were eight, my children are four.
I went to the SASSA offices and this person had made a grant for her eight children. They had changed the address for my social grant to Grahamstown."
"I was sick with worry. At Home Affairs, the women said they will get me a new number. But I was worried that if I get another number I would still suffer." And so Nyendwana had to apply for an ID document yet again. She was forced to do so after her bank account was frozen.
Nyendwana says each and every time she has had to go back to the Home Affairs offices it has been a shameful, tormenting experience for her.
After applying for her ID document again earlier this year she wrote a six-page letter to Home Affairs in Pretoria to tell them what had happened and to describe her suffering. "I got a response from an assistant manager who said he was shocked and told me to write a statement. I got a phone call from a Mrs Naidoo to say she had spoken with this official."
Nyendwana says she didn't know what further to expect from Home Affairs.
"I was thinking they would call me again but they didn't phone." A couple of months later Nyendwana got notification that her ID book was ready. "The first person I met when I went to Home Affairs was the same officer. I was shocked. I got my new ID but I was so angry. I went to this man and I said: "Do you know what you have done with me?" He said he was going to beat me. I said he could beat me because he had hurt me and the beating would not pain me more."
The seamstress started scolding the government official and attacking him. The police were called, who tried to intervene and protect the government official from Nyendwana. A few days later Nyendwana had a court protection order filed against her by the official.
Nyendwana says she has made a case against the police and is waiting for a case number. "Now that I have spoken out I feel better, but I am not better. To be honest I am suffering. If I had my ID, I would be somewhere. I would be living in a decent place compared to where I am living. This official was there to serve us. He took me and made my life miserable. I am hurt. Very hurt. I wish men didn't take women for granted. I feel I was taken for granted. How many people are in my situation like this? I am not the first person. I am not the last person."
Daily Maverick was first alerted to this story by the Daily Sun.
Journalist Mkhuseli Sizani who wrote the story says he often gets calls from foreigners who complain about corruption and Home Affairs officials who demand bribes in order to secure documents. In August Daily Maverick ran a story about Zimbabweans who say they had to pay officials at the Marabastad Refugee Centre in Pretoria bribes to secure papers.
"I spoke to Sonto Lusu, the Home Affairs regional manager for Port Elizabeth and Ronnie Mamoepa the national spokesperson who said they will follow this up. I am also going to continue writing on this matter, but I am just waiting for the arrest to happen and for the case number," says Sizani. Mamoepa says he views the allegations in a serious light and that Home Affairs will investigate and "deal harshly" with the official if the complaint is proven true.
"This woman's life has been shattered. Because of this ID problem she hasn't been able to become a teacher and the officials abused their power which is a bad habit for our country." Sizani says if the matter is proved to be true, the real question will be how many other people were victimised by the man. "It is terrible. What I want to know is was the delay in her ID intentional so as to make her vulnerable?"
The alleged sex offender's name has been given to Daily Maverick but is being withheld until a thorough investigation into Nyendwana's complaint has been conducted.
iMaverick is South Africa's first daily tablet newspaper and includes coverage from the Daily Maverick and Free African Media. To subscribe, go to: www.imaverick.co.za
http://allafrica.com/stories/201109141074.html
Saturday 17 September 2011
Costs of Legal Claims against Home Affairs
Home Affairs: What are the costs of defending a dysfunctional department?
Annette Lovemore, Shadow Minister of Home Affairs
12 October 2010
12 October 2010
The pending legal claims of R6.862 billion against the Department of Home Affairs have been well publicised since the release of the department’s 2009/10 annual report during last week. However, what the annual report does not tell the South African public is how much has been spent by the Department on defending legal challenges and on paying the costs of those challenges during the past financial year. This is most concerning, as in many instances, the legal challenges are ones in which the Department has failed to deliver basic services, or acted in a potentially unlawful manner. R6.7 million was budgeted for legal consultants, but the actual costs incurred for such consultants was R23.7 million (up 124% from R10.6 million in 2008/09). And yet, no indication is given of actual costs incurred in settling these claims against the department.
A quick review of cases heard in our courts during the 2009/10 financial year reveals a disturbing trend with respect to this Department. The following selection of cases, and comments by attorneys and judges involved, provides a glimpse into the level of dysfunctionality that leads to the department losing one legal battle after another:
• May 2009, Lawyers for Human Rights press release
“On 10 May 2009, the day the Department of Home Affairs welcomed its new Minister, Home Affairs illegally deported an asylum seeker to the Democratic Republic of Congo...The deportation is a blatant violation of South Africa's domestic and international legal obligations, which prohibit returning an asylum seeker to an area where he risks persecution. Further, the deportation occurred just two days before his case against Home Affairs was to be heard in the Johannesburg High Court.
This is the fourteenth court case brought by LHR in the past three months challenging the unlawful arrest and detention of asylum seekers. In eleven of these cases, the court ordered the release of the applicant from Lindela Holding Facility. In the remaining two cases, Home Affairs agreed to release the detained person on the morning of the court hearing, after the detainee had been subjected to months of unlawful detention.”
• January 2010, South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, Aruforse v Minister of Home Affairs and Others
Judge Meyer commented: “A detained person has an absolute right not to be deprived of his freedom for one second longer than necessary by an official who cannot justify his detention... ordered to cause the immediate release of the applicant from the Lindela Holding Facility in Krugersdorp...The first and second respondents are ordered to pay the applicant’s costs of this application.”
• May 2010, News 24: South Africa’s Lawyers for Human Rights at the weekend secured the release of a Zimbabwean human rights defender, Petro Chatiza at the South Gauteng High Court... Gina Snyman of Lawyers for Human Rights represented Chatiza... “Home Affairs have caused this man an abhorrent injustice. Our courts have consistently held that a person should not be detained for one second longer than authorities can justify the detention, but Home Affairs acts with no urgency or recognition of the rights of the people it detains,” said Snyman in a statement. “It’s also appalling that our client had to borrow a smuggled telephone from a fellow detainee to get word out of his detention, and that we only knew of it via Amnesty International in London.”
• July 2010, Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown, Ncube v Minister of Home Affairs and Others
Review of refusal to grant a work permit
Judge Revelas commented : “The history of the matter...serves to illustrate the continued unfair treatment of the first appellant and the irrational and malevolent manner in which his attempts to legalise his status were dealt with by Home Affairs...”
The Department is currently facing a court challenge by four couples, in an attempt to force the issue of the relevant spousal permits, while two asylum seekers have initiated a court case in Cape Town to force the Department to consider asylum applications at any centre in South Africa. The Forum of Immigration Practitioners of South Africa (FIPSA) is dealing with many permit applications which are taking the department between four and six months to process, despite the statutory requirement that such applications are to be dealt with within 30 days. FIPSA is considering legal action to force the Department to comply with its own laws.
All of these cases, as well as the many others, along with the attached costs, are as a result of the Department simply not doing its job.
It is concerning when people have to take the Department to court in order for it to perform its mandated duties. Furthermore, this comes at great expense not only to the South African public – money which is now subsidizing the legal battles of a dysfuncional Department - but also at great cost to the person who is being denied services from the Department.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) will submit questions to the Minister in this regard, and will make the reply public. More importantly, the DA will continue to use all available tools to compel the Department to deliver on its own value statement and become efficient and professional, thus obviating the need to defend patently justified court challenges.
A quick review of cases heard in our courts during the 2009/10 financial year reveals a disturbing trend with respect to this Department. The following selection of cases, and comments by attorneys and judges involved, provides a glimpse into the level of dysfunctionality that leads to the department losing one legal battle after another:
• May 2009, Lawyers for Human Rights press release
“On 10 May 2009, the day the Department of Home Affairs welcomed its new Minister, Home Affairs illegally deported an asylum seeker to the Democratic Republic of Congo...The deportation is a blatant violation of South Africa's domestic and international legal obligations, which prohibit returning an asylum seeker to an area where he risks persecution. Further, the deportation occurred just two days before his case against Home Affairs was to be heard in the Johannesburg High Court.
This is the fourteenth court case brought by LHR in the past three months challenging the unlawful arrest and detention of asylum seekers. In eleven of these cases, the court ordered the release of the applicant from Lindela Holding Facility. In the remaining two cases, Home Affairs agreed to release the detained person on the morning of the court hearing, after the detainee had been subjected to months of unlawful detention.”
• January 2010, South Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, Aruforse v Minister of Home Affairs and Others
Judge Meyer commented: “A detained person has an absolute right not to be deprived of his freedom for one second longer than necessary by an official who cannot justify his detention... ordered to cause the immediate release of the applicant from the Lindela Holding Facility in Krugersdorp...The first and second respondents are ordered to pay the applicant’s costs of this application.”
• May 2010, News 24: South Africa’s Lawyers for Human Rights at the weekend secured the release of a Zimbabwean human rights defender, Petro Chatiza at the South Gauteng High Court... Gina Snyman of Lawyers for Human Rights represented Chatiza... “Home Affairs have caused this man an abhorrent injustice. Our courts have consistently held that a person should not be detained for one second longer than authorities can justify the detention, but Home Affairs acts with no urgency or recognition of the rights of the people it detains,” said Snyman in a statement. “It’s also appalling that our client had to borrow a smuggled telephone from a fellow detainee to get word out of his detention, and that we only knew of it via Amnesty International in London.”
• July 2010, Eastern Cape High Court, Grahamstown, Ncube v Minister of Home Affairs and Others
Review of refusal to grant a work permit
Judge Revelas commented : “The history of the matter...serves to illustrate the continued unfair treatment of the first appellant and the irrational and malevolent manner in which his attempts to legalise his status were dealt with by Home Affairs...”
The Department is currently facing a court challenge by four couples, in an attempt to force the issue of the relevant spousal permits, while two asylum seekers have initiated a court case in Cape Town to force the Department to consider asylum applications at any centre in South Africa. The Forum of Immigration Practitioners of South Africa (FIPSA) is dealing with many permit applications which are taking the department between four and six months to process, despite the statutory requirement that such applications are to be dealt with within 30 days. FIPSA is considering legal action to force the Department to comply with its own laws.
All of these cases, as well as the many others, along with the attached costs, are as a result of the Department simply not doing its job.
It is concerning when people have to take the Department to court in order for it to perform its mandated duties. Furthermore, this comes at great expense not only to the South African public – money which is now subsidizing the legal battles of a dysfuncional Department - but also at great cost to the person who is being denied services from the Department.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) will submit questions to the Minister in this regard, and will make the reply public. More importantly, the DA will continue to use all available tools to compel the Department to deliver on its own value statement and become efficient and professional, thus obviating the need to defend patently justified court challenges.
http://www.da.org.za/newsroom.htm?action=view-news-item&id=8786
Tuesday 6 September 2011
More backlogs? 400 contract workers not reinstated
Lapsing of contracts: DG wants answers
INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPERS
Director-general of Home Affairs Mkuseli Apleni addresses the media about the administration of the department. Picture: Sizwe Ndingane
Senior managers at the Department of Home Affairs’ Pretoria offices will have to explain why they let contract workers continue performing their duties when their contracts had ended.
It has come to light that about 400 contract workers whose contracts expired last Thursday were allowed to continue working last Friday and on Monday after their contracts had expired.
Some claimed they had been asked to carry on working as their contracts would be extended, as they had been in March.
The workers, mostly based at the department’s Watloo offices, said they were stopped from working only on Tuesdday and told to leave the premises when they reported for duty.
Home Affairs director-general Mkuseli Apleni said if it was proven that workers were allowed to work while out of contract, the senior managers responsible would have to explain how this happened.
“If it is true, that means some managers did not comply with the contracts the department had signed with the contract workers.
“The contracts clearly state that June 30 was their last day in the service of the department and they were not supposed to work beyond that,” Apleni said.
The workers claimed to have been unfairly dismissed by the department, and said they should have been given sufficient notice before their contracts were terminated.
Requesting anonymity for fear of victimisation, they explained that when their contracts came to an end at the end of last month, they were asked to continue working because there was still a big workload.
One said: “They promised us three-month contracts to last until the projected end of the project in September, but they also said we should expect an extension after that - until December, because of the huge workload.”
On Friday and Monday they went about their normal duties, which included processing applications for Zimbabwean nationals who wished to live and work in South Africa, but when they arrived at work on Tuesday, they said, they were told to stop working and to leave immediately, because they no longer had contracts with the department.
“We were told to hand in state equipment and to take all our belongings, or risk being thrown out by security (guards) if we did not leave.”
They said the workload consisted of more than 147 000 untouched files which were waiting for outstanding requirements like fingerprints, letters from employers and passports, and an additional pile of completed files waiting for approval.
“We should have been given a month’s notice, because we have families to support, bills and installments to pay – what will we do now?” another asked.
Apleni said the department had advertised a total of 558 posts and had received more than 143 000 applications for the positions.
Only 104 contract workers were retained for the permanent positions, and more contract workers would be released from the department leading up to the July 31 deadline for processing applications by Zimbabweans wishing to stay and work in South Africa. - Pretoria News
Monday 5 September 2011
R97 million unauthorised expenditure
Unauthorised Expenditure by the Department of Home Affairs: National Treasury briefing to the
Standing Committee on Public Accounts
Date of Meeting: 17 Aug 2011
Chairperson: Mr T Godi (APC)
Summary:
The National Treasury told the Standing Committee that unauthorised expenditure by the Department of Home Affairs amounted to R97 million. Expenditure was related to the conversion of a manual fingerprint database to electronic, and funds earmarked for capital expenditure used for current expenditure. The Treasury recommended that the amount be recovered from the baseline.
Members expressed displeasure with the long delay in bringing matters to book, seeing that the year in question was 2005/06. It was felt that individuals responsible for unauthorised expenditure had to be called to account and acted against. The Department was asked if the fingerprint project had produced value for money, to which it replied that it would grant national access to all security agencies.
……….
Minutes:
National Treasury on unauthorised expenditure in the Department of Home Affairs
Mr Devan Naido , Chief Deirector: Economic Services from National Treasury told the Committee that the total unauthorised expenditure by the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) stood at R97 million. Overexpenditure during the 2005/06 financial year, amounted to R52 million. An informcation and communications technology (ICT) project had been launched in the last quarter of that finance year. The Treasury had been interested to know the reasons for that. An amount of R4.6 million, earmarked for capital expenditure, had been used for current expenditure. The Department had declared that there were measures in place to prevent recurrence, but steps against a specific person responsible were considered. The Treasury recommended that the amount be recovered from the baseline.
Discussion
The Chairperson remarked that accountability was departmental.
Ms A Dreyer (DA) asked who the Director-General of Home Affairs had been at the time. Consequences had to be considered and actions taken against persons who had to be held to account.
Mr Issac Mabena, Deirector: Administrative Services from the Department of Home Affairs answered that it had been Ambassador Mzuvukile Maqethuka.
Ms Dreyer proposed that he be called in to answer.
Mr N Singh (IFP) remarked on the long time lapse that had occurred before matters were brought to book. The unauthorised expenditure by Home Affairs dated back to 2005/06. He asked why it had taken so long to bring the matter before the Committee. The person responsible in one instance may have disappeared or gone underground.
The Treasury replied that the danger of unauthorised expenditure had been consistently highlighted by it. The Department had neglected to write a letter to it about problems experienced. Engagement with the Treasury about facts was necessarily time-consuming.
The Chairperson remarked that the call had to go out to departments to act with speed, where unauthorised expenditure was concerned. If there was procrastination, the Treasury could not act.
Ms M Mangena (ANC) referred to the amount of R53 million, and asked what had happened. With reference to the DA proposal, she said that the DHA could have made an offer for R46 million to be recovered. She asked what had to be done to recover that amount.
Mr Mkuseli Apleni, the Director-General (DG) of Home Affairs, replied that the Department had allocated R92 million in 2004/05 for the back record conversion project. Service providers had been appointed. The project was initiated to establish an electronic fingerprint record of everyone in the country. Little work was performed during 2004/05, with work only commencing in March. The DHA was unable to spend the R92 million. R389 million was saved in that year. The Department submitted a rollover request. The contract was signed in September 2004. Judgement estimates were decided in October. R132 million was required for the project. In August 2005, the Treasury approved R97 million out of the R389 million saved, to be reserved. The amount was granted on condition that it be allocated in the Department if spending trends were to tend towards overspending. The Department eventually spent R226 million on the project. The baseline amount came to R132 million. Money was being placed outside of the process. R51 million was reserved. There was overspending on goods and services. R46 million was allocated to capital expenditure. Money was taken for licences. Licences were not software, but in that case it was interpreted as being so. Software was part of capital expenditure. The Auditor General found that to be wrong. Overspending may have been wrong, but the DHA did approach the Treasury for a rollover of funds, which was approved. R389 million was returned to the fiscal. The R97 million reserved for the Department, was not requested at the right time. No access to the R97 million would have a major impact, seeing that Home Affairs had not yet turned the corner as a department. The Committee was asked to consider condoning the expenditure.
Ms M Matladi (UCDP) pointed out that there was a difference between saving and underspending. If an amount was budgeted for service delivery and a department failed, it was not a saving. The DHA had admitted that it had been wrong not to go back to the Treasury about the matter. She asked what had been done to correct the situation.
The DG responded that the way to correct the matter was first to acknowledge the problem. A letter had to be written to Treasury.
Ms T Chiloane (ANC) asked about value for money for the project undertaken.
The DG responded that Home Affairs was the custodian of fingerprints. The change from a manual fingerprint record to an electronic one, meant that access to fingerprints for the police and others, had been established. The Department was proud of that achievement.
Ms G Saal (ANC) said that overspending was better than underspending. She asked for reasons why there had been the delay to report back about the promised money.
Mr Singh opined that it had been up to the Treasury to pick up the error. He was not in favour of condoning the expenditure. There had to be efforts to see how much could be made up by other means. It could be staggered, if necessary.
The Chairperson reminded the Committee that no decisions needed to be reached on that day.
.................
The Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
Copyright © Parliamentary Monitoring Group, South Africa
http://www.pmg.org.za/report/20110817-national-treasury-unauthorised-expenditure-requested-department-home-
Sunday 4 September 2011
Refugees sue Home Affairs
Aug 8, 2011 | KHETHIWE CHELEMU
In what could be a landmark case, 19 Ethiopian men have taken Minister of Home Affairs Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma to court, claiming her department illegally arrested them.
In court papers filed in the Johannesburg High Court, the men claim that the Department of Foreign Affairs acted unlawfully by arresting them hours after they arrived in the city on June 26 and by refusing them access to apply for asylum.The men, all supporters of Ethiopia's opposition party, the Oromo Liberation Front, fled their country in May last year because of political persecution.
They detail their painstaking journey to South Africa following a year-long trek on foot through countries such as Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi and Mozambique.
The men, who are being detained at the Lindela centre, want the court to interdict Dlamini-Zuma, her director-general, Mkhuseli Apleni, and security company Bosasa, which runs the centre, from deporting them back to their country.
"We are currently detained unlawfully and threatened with deportation. We have suffered and continue to suffer prejudice," they said in a collective affidavit.
"We are subject to ongoing violations of our rights to human dignity, freedom of movement and rights against arbitrary detention."
The men said they were unfamiliar with South African law and did not know they could have applied for protection at the border.
"We are now advised that failure to apply for protection at the border does not prevent us from applying for asylum."
Two days after their arrest, an attorney from Lawyers for Human Rights wrote to the department to demand their immediate release and the opportunity to apply for asylum.
The department did not reply.
Setting out the events that led to them seeking refuge in South Africa, the men state that they fled their home country after being pursued, threatened and, in some cases, severely injured by the police and members of the ruling Ethiopian People's Revolutionary Democratic Front. They entered the country through the Mozambique-South Africa border exactly a year after they had left Ethiopia.
In Kenya and Tanzania, the group worked on farms to support themselves to continue their journey to South Africa.
The group wants the court to grant them the right to apply for asylum and order Dlamini-Zuma to pay for their legal costs.
"Deportation to Ethiopia would place our lives and security at risk and violate our rights under the Refugee Act and would contravene South Africa's international law obligations of non-refoulement," they state in their court papers.
Nicola Whittaker, who represents the men, refused to comment, saying the case was "sensitive".
"I am happy to confirm that I am representing the applicants. Unfortunately, I am not going to discuss the merits with you at this stage."
Home Affairs deputy director-general Jackie Mackay said she could not comment on a matter that was sub judice.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2011/08/08/refugees-sue-home-affairs
Saturday 3 September 2011
Refugees in court for better conditions
Refugees in SA fight for better conditions
21 Aug 2011 | ANDREW MUBAYIWA
A group of asylum- seekers has applied to the High Court in Pretoria for an order directing the Home Affairs ministry to provide adequate refugee reception offices in South Africa, including in Johannesburg.
Zimbabweans stand in a long queue at a Home Affairs office in SA when a deportation deadline loomed In a joint application, 74 asylum-seekers and two Johannesburg-based immigrant rights groups want the ministry's failure to set up enough reception offices declared "unlawful and unconstitutional".
Lawyers for Human Rights has filed the application on behalf of the asylum-seekers, the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa (Cormsa) and the Coordinating Body of Refugee Communities (CBRC).
SA Home Affairs Minister Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma and her director-general, Mkuseli Apleni, are first and second respondents. The director of asylum-seeker management and the officers in charge at Marabastad and the Tshwane Interim Refugee Reception (Tirro) are the other respondents in the matter, which has yet to be set down for hearing.
The ministry had not yet responded to questions on the matter at the time of going to press. The ministry last May closed the Crown Mines refugee reception office that served Johannesburg, which arguably housed the greatest number of immigrants. The office was closed after nearby businesses filed a court application alleging crowds of immigrants that flocked to the office were disturbing their operations.
Following the closure, asylum-seekers from Johannesburg were asked to use the reception offices at Marabastad and Tirro that were already barely able to cope with their own workloads before the addition of tens of thousands more people who used to go to Crown Mines.
This, the applicants say, has led to overcrowding at the two reception offices and, in many cases, it has become virtually impossible for asylum-seekers to get the assistance due to them under the Refugees Act.
The matter first came to court in July this year as two applications by eight asylum applicants who wanted to renew their expired Section 22 permits, also known as asylum-seeker permits, obtained from Crown Mines before its closure. They wanted the ministry ordered to renew the permits after failing to have this done at Tirro because of overcrowding there.
The second group of 66 new applicants for Section 22 permits wanted the ministry directed to grant them immediate access to Marabastad so they could lodge their applications after failing to do so because of congestion at the reception office.
But the court found that it was not in the interests of justice to consider relief for the particular applicants only. It said it preferred hearing evidence of a "class of similarly situated asylum applicants" in order for the systemic problems which had led to the original applications to be considered.
Both applications were postponed so they could be amended into one omnibus application tackling the myriad problems bedevelling the refugee management system and to also allow Cormsa and CRBC to join in the matter. Among other key aspects the applicants want the ministry ordered to do are that it probes corruption at Maraba-stad and Tirro, implements measures to maximise productivity at the two offices and also that it ensures force is not used unnecessarily against asylum applicants.
They also want the ministry ordered to introduce effective queue management systems at reception offices, put up signage stating procedures for applying for asylum, scrap fines for asylum-seekers who failed to renew permits on or after June this year and set up grievance and complaints desks at Marabastad and Tirro.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/africa/2011/08/21/refugees-in-sa-fight-for-better-conditions?service=print
Friday 2 September 2011
Most work permits for low/unskilled foreigners
****If you are having problems that are not being adequately addressed, phone the Home Affairs DG on his cellphone. Read more here.****
Majority of work permits go to low or unskilled foreigners
INL
ANDISIWE MAKINANA
DESPITE South Africa’s pressing need for skills, the majority of work permits issued by the Department of Home Affairs to foreigners are issued to low-skilled and unskilled workers.
Yesterday, MPs were shocked to hear that South Africa issued 135 000 work permits to foreigners between April 2010 and March this year, with the majority of them in the low and unskilled labour categories.
About 67 000 work permits were issued in the first quarter of this financial year (March to June), with almost 90 percent of them going to Zimbabweans.
The department’s deputy director-general for immigration, Jackson McKay, said the numbers had been pushed up by the recent Zimbabwe Dispensation Project that ended in July.
McKay was briefing a joint meeting of Parliament’s oversight committees on labour and home affairs “on the presence of foreign nationals within the South African labour market”.
He revealed that in the three months between March and June, 59 363 work permits had been issued to Zimbabweans, but only 672 corporate work permits, 699 exceptional skills permits, 3 202 general work permits, 1 252 permits that fall under the quota system and 1 719 work permits in terms of the provisions of Section 19 (5) of the Immigration Act (which provides for intra-company transfers) were issued during the same period.
The department couldn’t say, however, how many professional foreigners there were seeking jobs in the country, or give a breakdown of their professions, countries of origin and whether they had entered legally and had work permits.
DA MP George Boinamo wanted to know whether there were any measures in place to ensure foreigners were not employed in jobs for which South Africans were qualified “to ensure locals are not made to roam the streets with useful qualifications”.
“If you are not careful, these are some of the things that cause xenophobia,” Boinamo warned.
Another DA MP, Ian Ollis, also questioned the high number of permits issued to low or unskilled foreigners.
“It seems we are giving the permits to the wrong category. It looks like we’ve been too easy with the wrong kinds of categories of people that we are bringing into the country,” he said.
McKay responded that it was important to do a study of migration trends to South Africa to get an understanding of the matter.
Many people came to the country who didn’t qualify according to the Immigration Act, which looked at high-end or highly skilled labour.
“We need to look at the pushing through factors and we will find the answers on why these low-skilled permits are being issued.”
He said low-skilled and unskilled migrants were not catered for under the present permitting regime, which was a “major weakness of the current Immigration Act and a contributor to irregular migration to the country, as well as the abuse of the refugee regime, where a lot of economic migrants are using the asylum seeker route to come into the country”.
McKay said many economic migrants, people who sought jobs, were exploiting a loophole in the law by applying for an asylum seeker permit which was in fact a work permit as it allowed one to work and study and was issued free of charge.
Thursday 1 September 2011
'Smuggled' Zimbabwean children taken home
Sapa | 11 August, 2011 10:18
A group of 21 children who were allegedly smuggled into South Africa from Zimbabwe on Wednesday have been taken home by the Department of Home Affairs.
Limpopo police spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Mohale Ramatseba said on Thursday that a 32-year-old Bulawayo man had allegedly helped the children to cross the Limpopo River into South Africa on Wednesday morning."The children were referred to Home Affairs and taken back to Zimbabwe," Ramatseba said.
"The Bulawayo man paid a R2000 admission of guilt fine for smuggling illegally."
Ramatseba said the man had "apparently" been hired by children's parents.
He was to have transported the children, aged between one and 16, to Johannesburg from Bulawayo.
He was apprehended in South Africa at around 6am on Wednesday while loading the children into a car in a bushy area between the South African side of the border and Musina.
The man paid a fine and was handed over to the Zimbabwean police.
"More charges will be preferred against him upon completion of investigations," Zimbabwean police officer commanding Beitbridge Chief Superintendent Lawrence Chinhengo told the country's Herald Online newspaper.
The children were taken under the care of Save the Children Centre in Zimbabwe while investigations continued.
"We are yet to verify the suspect's claim that he was taking them to their parents," Chinhengo said.
"The suspect will soon be sent to court and we want to strongly warn all those involved in such criminal acts that their days are numbered."
Seven other men who were travelling in the same vehicle were also arrested for contravening the Immigration Act.
Among them, five had valid travel passports though they had opted to leave the country through an illegal crossing point, said Chinhengo.
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/2011/08/11/smuggled-zimbabwean-children-taken-home
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)