South Africa Shifts Refugee Policy to Camps Amid Controversy

• South Africa has established a temporary repatriation center in Musina, raising concerns about its refugee policy shift.
• The country's traditional approach allows refugees and asylum seekers to live, work, and study in urban centers.
• Recent constitutional court rulings have strengthened the rights of asylum seekers by removing procedural barriers to accessing the asylum system.

Legally speaking, all refugees are migrants. But not all migrants are refugees.

South Africa's recent actions have raised questions about its long-standing approach to managing migrants and refugees. The country has traditionally allowed refugees and asylum seekers to live, work, and study in urban centers, rather than confining them to designated refugee camps. However, the establishment of a temporary repatriation center in Musina, a border town with Zimbabwe, in July 2026, has sparked concerns that South Africa may be moving towards a more camp-based approach. This would mark a significant departure from its post-apartheid refugee policy, which has been characterized by a relatively open-door approach to refugees and asylum seekers.

Legally speaking, all refugees are migrants, but not all migrants are refugees. A refugee is someone who has crossed an international border in search of protection due to fear of persecution based on their race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group. International law provides protections for individuals in these circumstances through the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 protocol. However, these conventions have been criticized for not adequately addressing contemporary forms of displacement, such as those driven by climate change.

South Africa's refugee system has faced criticism for being overly complex and burdensome for asylum seekers. The process of renewing temporary section 22 permits every six months at refugee reception offices places a heavy burden on them, with many claims being rejected at the first stage and the appeals process taking years to resolve. In fact, an audit in 2019 revealed that it would take 68 years to clear the appeals backlog. Recent constitutional court rulings have, however, strengthened the rights of asylum seekers by declaring parts of the Refugees Act unconstitutional, particularly those that imposed procedural barriers to accessing the asylum system.

Lawyers and compliance officers should be aware that the recent constitutional court rulings in South Africa may impact asylum seekers' ability to reapply for refugee status, and that procedural failures are no longer sufficient grounds for disqualification. This may require updates to client advisories and compliance procedures.

Source: Original reporting via Briefly