The Department of Home Affairs has noted the judgment handed down on Tuesday by the Constitutional Court in the matter between the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town and the Minister of Home Affairs.
The Scalabrini Centre is a non-profit organisation that assists migrants, refugees, and local South Africans.
The case between the centre and the Minister concerned the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Refugees Act relating to the asylum application process. The Constitutional Court confirmed the Western Cape High Court's declaration these provisions were unconstitutional and invalid.
The court declared sections of the Refugees Act, which allowed for immigration officials to deport an asylum seeker if they are in the country without a transit visa, unconstitutional. A transit visa is issued at a port of entry to allow a person to travel to a refugee reception centre and apply for asylum.
“The department respects the authority of the Constitutional Court and will study the judgment carefully to consider its implications, including the reasons provided by the Court, before determining the appropriate way forward.
“The department remains firmly committed to upholding the Constitution, while restoring and maintaining the rule of law through a secure, lawful and well-managed immigration system.
“We remain committed to protecting the integrity of South Africa's immigration system, while ensuring that our policies and legislation continue to give effect to the Constitution and the country's international obligations,” the department said.
The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, represented by Lawyers for Human Rights, challenged the Minister of Home Affairs regarding practices related to asylum seekers and the "good cause" interviews required for their applications. If applicants failed to meet these conditions, they had to provide immigration officers with a valid reason and show “good cause” for lacking the required visa.
The case was brought to the Western Cape High Court, where the applicants argued that certain provisions of the Refugees Act unjustly barred individuals with irregular immigration statuses from seeking asylum, violating their constitutional rights and international non-refoulement principles
On 15 May 2025, the court ruled that specific sections of the Refugees Act were unconstitutional. The provisions in question included sections that penalised individuals for bureaucratic infractions, effectively blocking their access to refugee protections.
The court emphasised that these regulations disproportionately affected vulnerable groups, particularly children, and failed to align with constitutional imperatives regarding the best interests of children. – SAnews.gov.za
