ANTI-FOREIGNER UNREST: Home Affairs scraps asylum seeker directive after violence in Durban and Soweto

On Friday, 9 October 2026, the director-general of the Department of Home Affairs (DHA) withdrew a directive instructing its offices to accept asylum applications so they could be judged on their merits rather than excluded on procedural grounds.

The reversal follows protests this week by anti-immigrant groups and widespread misinformation suggesting the directive granted asylum seekers citizenship or voting rights.

The Home Affairs directive was issued on 28 September following a Constitutional Court ruling in July that declared certain provisions of the Refugees Act unconstitutional and invalid.

The court found that procedural hurdles could have prevented asylum seekers from accessing a merits-based assessment of their claim, particularly given the constitutional right to dignity and the principle of non-refoulement, which prevents states from returning people to countries where they face persecution or other serious harm.

The directive instructed Refugee Reception Offices (RROs) to receive people who report in person and indicate that they intend to apply for asylum, and to assist them in lodging their applications.

It applied to people who had entered the country unlawfully, had entered somewhere other than a designated port of entry, did not have a visa, or had failed to report to one of the country’s five offices within five days.

Misinformation campaign

On Thursday, the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration reasserted that the court’s judgment does not automatically grant refugee status or permanent residence, nor does it legalise unlawful migration.

“The ruling does not grant automatic refugee status or guarantee a right to remain in South Africa indefinitely. Every applicant must still subject themselves to the formal Refugee Status Determination process, where their claims will be thoroughly investigated under the strict criteria set out in international and domestic law.”

Still, anti-immigrant groups and some political figures have used the judgment and directive, and in many instances misrepresented its meaning, to amplify anti-immigrant sentiment in South Africa.

Many of their claims are unsupported by evidence.

One false claim circulating on social media, fuelled in part by long queues of asylum applicants at reception offices, is that asylum seekers are being registered to vote ahead of the 2026 local government elections. 

On Tuesday, 6 October, members of March and March disrupted asylum applications at the Durban Refugee Reception Centre on Che Guevara Road, where hundreds of people had queued to apply for asylum.

Protesters subsequently continued to block access to the centre. The group argued that the asylum system was being abused and that people who were not genuine refugees were using it to remain in the country.

Protests in Durban have continued throughout the week, with violence escalating, leaving people injured, multiple vehicles torched and foreign-owned shops looted.

In Soweto on Thursday, 8 October, anti-foreigner demonstrators clashed with foreign shop owners amid reports of gunshots and property destruction. Vehicles were also set alight.

Earlier on Thursday, the inter-ministerial committee admitted that RROs had been overwhelmed by people seeking to apply for asylum following the Home Affairs’ directive, with police assisting officials to manage the queues.

The committee also addressed the misinformation surrounding the ruling, warning that false or sensational claims could fuel social tensions and undermine confidence in public institutions.

The DHA said on Friday: “The attempt to practically implement the judgment immediately led to serious consequences that could not have been foreseen in the court order. This includes, among others, the fact that RRO operations were overwhelmed within a matter of days since the directive was issued, Home Affairs officials were placed at risk, and that serious threats to public safety and order had emerged,” said the DHA.

“With these new facts now at hand, the department will embark on a fresh process to determine the most appropriate operational approach to ensure compliance with the Constitutional Court’s order. The department reaffirms its respect for the judiciary and the rule of law, as well as its commitment to determine an operationally appropriate and sustainable method to comply with the order.”

Before scrapping its directive, Home Affairs announced it would report disinformation regarding the directive to the Electoral Commission for alleged breaches of the Electoral Code of Conduct. It did not disclose the political parties it planned to report. DM