News24.com | OPINION | Denying asylum seekers humanitarian aid is inimical to international refugee protection

42m ago

OPINION | Denying asylum seekers humanitarian aid is inimical to international refugee protection

Share
play article
Subscribers can listen to this article
Rwanda's UNHCR, the UN refugee agency, senior protection officer Zahra Mirghani (C) welcoming the first arrival of 66 refugees and asylum seekers from Libya at the Kigali international airport in Kigali, Rwanda.
Rwanda's UNHCR, the UN refugee agency, senior protection officer Zahra Mirghani (C) welcoming the first arrival of 66 refugees and asylum seekers from Libya at the Kigali international airport in Kigali, Rwanda.
Cyril Ndegeya, Rwanda's Ministry of Emergency Mana

As the world is challenged by the impact of Covid-19 on the welfare of people, we cannot reflect on a humanitarian approach to the protection of asylum seekers without considering the impact of Covid-19 on their protection, writes Callixte Kavuro.


The commemoration of World Humanitarian Day on 19 August gives us a golden opportunity to reflect on the principle of international refugee protection as applied to asylum seekers.

This principle is founded on the notion that the refugee related socio-economic problems require a humanitarian approach to solve them. Individuals who escape from civil war, generalised violence, political persecution or flagrant human rights violations are in the greatest need of humanitarian relief once they arrive at a safe place.

Although our focus is on asylum seekers, we are cognisant that individuals may find themselves in a humanitarian crisis caused by arson, drought, flood and other events beyond their control such as economic hardship caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

As the world is challenged by the impact of Covid-19 on the welfare of people, we cannot reflect on a humanitarian approach to the protection of asylum seekers without considering the impact of Covid-19 on their protection.

It is within this understanding of the Covid-19 humanitarian crisis that the United Nations' strategic priorities of the Global Humanitarian Response Plan to Covid-19 include the goal to protect, assist and advocate for refugees, internally displaced people, migrants and host communities particularly vulnerable to the pandemic.

In South Africa, the most vulnerable people to the socio-economic effects of the pandemic are asylum seekers as the current socio-economic laws do not consider them as individuals who should benefit from socio-economic protection. In line with these socio-economic laws, asylum seekers were excluded from the group of beneficiaries of the Covid-19 humanitarian and economic relief packages.

The exclusion from humanitarian, social and economic protection is being justified on the grounds that many economic migrants who regularise their stay in the country through the "asylum management system" will benefit from such protection. It is true that the asylum management system is easily accessible to economic migrants and this problem has not been addressed for two decades.

Economic migrants are not welcome in the country as they do "not" meet the immigration law requirement of self-sufficiency and economic independency. On the other hand, destitute asylum seekers are welcomed in the country on humanitarian grounds.

Weaknesses in the asylum management system can be drawn from the fact that from 2008 to 2012, South Africa received the largest number of new asylum applications worldwide, registering 800 000 new asylum claims, mostly from Zimbabweans. Between 2010 and 2019, South Africa was the fourth major destination for new asylum seekers after Germany, the US and France. By 2019, there were 188 296 "documented" asylum seekers and 89 285 who were formally recognised as refugees.

The Department of Home Affairs maintains that 90% of asylum seekers are economic migrants who do not deserve international refugee protection. It always raises this contention to justify the reasons why asylum seekers are excluded from humanitarian protection. Contrary to this contention, there had been no intention from the government to protect asylum seekers' humanitarian needs. This view is supported by the fact that both Regulations to the Refugees Act of 2000 and Regulations to the Refugees Act of 2018 do not allow asylum seekers to have access to life-saving services, unless they are formally recognised as genuine refugees.

It follows that asylum seekers cannot have access to humanitarian assistance in the form of social assistance (or social grants) and the Social Relief of Distress grants (or Covid-19 unemployment relief), designed to assist the most vulnerable people to put food on the table.

By its very nature, humanitarian assistance covers a number of aspects of socio-economic rights and benefits. According to the UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, humanitarian assistance should be defined in such a way that destitute asylum seekers "should be given all necessary support covering the basic necessities of life, including food, clothing and basic accommodation, throughout the asylum procedure until a final decision is taken on their application. If necessary, this should also apply to asylum seekers who are permitted to work but are unable to find adequate employment".

In South Africa, asylum seekers are not assisted with basic necessities of life such as shelter, food parcels and clothing. They remain homeless until they can afford their own accommodation.


Politicians believe that as the largest economy in the Southern African Development Community and the African continent, South Africa attracts many economic migrants that use the asylum management system as an entry point. They further argue that the provision of humanitarian assistance may attract more economic migrants. They view a high influx of economic migrants as a threat to national economy and security.

Accordingly, denial of humanitarian assistance, coupled with the exclusion from socio-economic programmes, is viewed as a mechanism to curb the flow of economic migrants. The refugee regime has repeatedly been amended with a view to restrict asylum seekers from having access to national resources and opportunities.

It is, however, crucial to note that the refugee problem is not a national problem per se.

Both asylum seekers and refugees are, in principle, afforded international refugee protection, which must be applied or enforced through international cooperation.

The international refugee law makes it clear that welcoming asylum seekers and assisting them should not be considered a "burden" or "unfriendly act", but "a peaceful and humanitarian act" that should be recognised by the international community and be lightened through international cooperation.

The African Union (AU) Convention Governing the Specific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa of 1969 provides that a country hosting refugees/asylum seekers can – through the AU – seek assistance from other AU members. This can happen in situations where such a country finds difficulty in continuing to offer an effective international refugee protection to refugees/asylum seekers. In the spirit of African solidarity and international cooperation, other countries are obliged to take appropriate measures to ease the burden of protecting refugees and asylum seekers.

On the other hand, the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 notes with concern that the protection of refugees and asylum seekers will indeed place unduly heavy burdens on certain countries and that this can be addressed through international cooperation. According to the 1951 convention, this international cooperation can be achieved through the UN and be coordinated and supervised by the UNHCR.

International cooperation defeats the arguments that the humanitarian protection of asylum seekers will result in the draining of South Africa's national resources.

Due to the lack of life-saving support and protection that can help them to integrate in the host communities or to put a food on their table, asylum seekers live in appalling conditions that were exacerbated by the national shutdown and their exclusion from Covid-19 economic relief packages.

This also had a significant impact on their well-being, health and dignity. 

As we celebrate World Humanitarian Day, we should remember that many asylum seekers in the country are being marginalised and sent from pillar to post.

South Africa should revise its asylum management system to ensure that it is accessible only to "genuine" asylum seekers and that they are provided with humanitarian relief and protection.

The government should note that when genuine asylum seekers are welcomed in the country, they are in an emergency situation that requires humanitarian response, including medical care, food, clothing, shelter and other basic necessities of life. They should not be left to their fate. 

- Dr Callixte Kavuro is a post-doctoral researcher in the department of public law at Stellenbosch University.


We know this was a long read and your time is precious. Did you know you can now listen to articles? Subscribe to News24 for access to this exciting feature and more.

Share