SA under fire by as Nigeria imposes ban

South Africa is once again feeling the heat over the treatment of undocumented immigrants, with Nigeria taking a decision to ban all ‘all official visits’ to the country, while the matter was discussed among several African states at the 18th Brics International Summit over the weekend and SA's Constitutional Court grapples with legalities surrounding asylum seekers, notes Legalbrief. The Nigerian national assembly on Friday said its decision comes in the wake of continued violence against immigrants, reports The Citizen. SA has for months been wracked by protests, some of them deadly, against foreigners – including one last week in the city of Durban, where marchers descended on an encampment of Congolese nationals, sparking violent clashes. ‘All official visits to the RSA by the National Assembly, its committees, lawmakers, officials and staff are hereby suspended,’ Akin Rotimi, spokesman for Nigeria’s lower chamber said. ‘The National Assembly cannot ignore persistent attacks on citizens abroad,’ Rotimi said, citing ‘reports of Nigerians killed, injured, displaced or forced to abandon businesses’. The ban also extends to ‘virtual/online engagements’. SA has long been a magnet for both undocumented and documented immigrants. Nigeria has become particularly outspoken on the issue, accusing SA of not doing enough to stop the violence. Tensions soared across SA after protesters set a 30 June deadline for undocumented immigrants to leave.

In response, South African International Relations Minister Ronald Lamola has strongly criticised Nigeria’s decision, according to a Facebook post by South Africa Vibes. Lamola described the move as unfortunate, arguing that disagreements over migration issues should not undermine the long-standing relationship between the two African nations. The Minister stressed the importance of continued diplomatic engagement and co-operation between SA and Nigeria, saying both countries play a crucial role in promoting stability, trade, and development across the continent. While tensions have risen following recent protests, South African officials maintain that dialogue remains the best way to address differences and preserve relations between Africa’s two largest economies.

The National Assembly emphasised that such emergency measures underscore the gravity of the crisis and reinforce the constitutional responsibility of Nigerian State institutions to safeguard the lives, dignity and interests of citizens abroad, reports Polity. The ban is comprehensive and applies to all planned visits to SA by the National Assembly, its standing committees, lawmakers, and administrative staff. Participation in conferences, seminars, workshops and parliamentary exchanges hosted, organised, or co-sponsored by the Parliament of SA is strictly prohibited. The National Assembly has urged the leadership of State Houses of Assembly across Nigeria's 36 states to adopt similar retaliatory measures. The clerk made it clear that no official delegation or individual may bypass this directive without prior express approval from the National Assembly leadership. Further, all existing invitations and proposed programmes are to be immediately reviewed. The legislative leadership described the boycott as a firm, measured response aimed at prioritising the welfare and dignity of Nigerians. Officials clarified that this decision is not an attempt to permanently dismantle Nigeria’s deep-rooted historical and diplomatic ties with SA. Instead, it serves as an ‘unambiguous expression of protest’ against the unsafe environment confronting Nigerians in SA. The suspension will be subject to review only when circumstances on the ground demonstrate a verifiable improvement in safety, it said.

Meanwhile, South African courts are grappling with the confusion caused by a Constitutional Court ruling on asylum seekers in July. Gauteng Judge President Aubrey Ledwaba has convened a full Bench to clarify how courts should apply the judgment, reports GroundUp. The South African apex court held that migrants cannot be deported before accessing the asylum system, striking down provisions of the Refugees Act that allowed deportation without considering applications. Yet two Gauteng judges have since issued conflicting judgments, leaving uncertainty over whether detainees should be released immediately or held while Home Affairs facilitates asylum procedures. In August, Judge Mandlenkosi Motha heard 21 applications from Ethiopian, Congolese and Nigerian nationals detained at the Lindela Repatriation Centre. They claimed they wished to apply for asylum but had not yet been interviewed by a refugee reception officer. Motha refused to release them, ordering instead that Home Affairs conduct interviews at Lindela or transport them to reception offices. He warned it would be 'the height of folly' to release undocumented people back into society, where they could face re-arrest. His ruling also referenced public sentiment shaped by anti-immigrant campaigns such as March and March and Operation Dudula, suggesting that the voices of 'downtrodden members of society' should be heard in these matters.

In contrast, GroundUp reports, Judge Stuart Wilson ordered the immediate release of an Ethiopian asylum seeker on 14 July. In written reasons delivered on 2 September, Wilson said the Constitutional Court required release once an intention to apply for asylum was expressed. He criticised Motha’s reliance on public opinion, cautioning against conflating impoverished communities with xenophobic organisations. 'I have my doubts about whether xenophobic organisations have much support among the poor and the vulnerable,' Wilson wrote, adding that most South Africans struggling with poverty would avoid blaming foreign nationals for their hardships. The divergence has strained court rolls, already burdened by asylum-related applications in the wake of anti-immigrant campaigns. To restore consistency, Ledwaba has imposed a moratorium on hearing affected cases until the full Bench sits on 29 October. The court will consider whether continued detention of asylum seekers aligns with constitutional protections and whether judges may order detention while Home Affairs facilitates access to refugee procedures. Ledwaba emphasised the need for legal certainty so that similar cases are treated alike. Ledwaba has invited interested parties and organisations, including the Ministers of Home Affairs and Police, the NDPP, Lawyers for Human Rights, the Scalabrini Centre and the UNHCR - to join as friends of the court. The ruling will set precedent not only in Gauteng but across SA, and depending on the outcome, could ultimately return to the Constitutional Court for final clarity. For now, asylum seekers remain in limbo, with their fate hinging on the October hearing. The October ruling will also have an impact in other provinces, and will shape SA’s refugee law landscape, balancing constitutional rights against public concerns over undocumented migration.

The rising tide of anti-foreign African sentiment in SA loomed large at the 18th Brics Summit in India that ended yesterday (Sunday), with some expressing deep disappointment over the xenophobic attacks in a country they admired as a bastion of human rights, reports The Citizen. Concern remains over Pretoria’s response. President Cyril Ramaphosa and leaders of three African countries affected by the anti-African protests attended the New Delhi summit: Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed, Ugandan Vice-President Jessica Alupo and Nigerian Foreign Bianca Odumegwu-Ojukwu. The African leaders held bilaterals to discuss the attacks, which led to the repatriation of thousands, but the debate raged on in the corridors of the summit. Adding to the tensions were reports of the killing of two Nigerians, Bishop Taiwo Michael Fakunie at his home in Johannesburg, on 4 September, and James Uchechukwu Nwankwo in Cape Town on 5 September, allegedly during interrogation by the police. Waniala Paul, a multi-media producer from Uganda’s Vision Group, said there was ‘a legitimate conversation to be had about irregular migration’ and that governments had a responsibility to know who enters their territory and enforce immigration and labour laws. But he rejected the notion that African migrants were responsible for crime. ‘Being undocumented does not make someone inherently criminal, and it certainly should not justify harassment or violence,’ he said. Idehai Frederick, chair of the Diplomatic Correspondents Association of Nigeria, said xenophobia undermined African solidarity and the spirit of Pan-African brotherhood. 'What makes this particularly painful for many Nigerians is the shared history between our countries. During the struggle against apartheid, Nigeria stood firmly with South Africa politically, diplomatically and financially.’