Joint Press Statement: for Immediate Release | Joint Civil Society Response to President Ramaphosa’s Address on Migration

Date: 15/06/2026


We, the Undersigned Organisations, Individuals, Groups, Movements and Communities welcome President Cyril Ramaphosa’s unequivocal condemnation of xenophobia, and unlawful attempts by private individuals and groups to enforce immigration laws.

The President’s affirmation that immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the state, and not private actors, is an important reaffirmation of the rule of law and South Africa’s constitutional commitment to human dignity, equality, and non-discrimination.

We acknowledge and welcome several important commitments in the President’s address.

  • The unequivocal rejection of unlawfulness attempts by private individuals and groups to enforce immigration. The President stated clearly that only authorised state officials may act against immigration law violations, that no person may confront others in the street to demand proof of nationality, and that the responsibility for immigration enforcement rests with the state and the state alone. We welcome this unambiguously.
  • The events in Durban in May 2026, in which anti-migrant formations surrounded police stations, accompanied enforcement operations, and issued public ultimatums to Migrants to leave by 30 June 2026, represent precisely the kind of parallel enforcement the President has now publicly and explicitly We call on the government to give concrete operational effect to this commitment.
  • The condemnation of xenophobia, Afrophobia, and ethnic. The President stated that there is no space for xenophobia, racism, Afrophobia, or any other form of intolerance in South Africa. We welcome this unequivocally.
  • The acknowledgment that anti-foreigner sentiment has been accompanied by ethnic and tribal attacks on South African. The President is correct that the instrumentalization of migration as a political narrative creates conditions for broader social division and violence. This concern is not limited to migrants.
  • The commitment to South Africa’s constitutional values and international obligations. The President reaffirmed South Africa’s commitment to the Constitution, to human  dignity, and  to its  international protection obligations. We note this commitment and will hold government to it in both policy and practice.
  • The acknowledgment that migrants are also exploited, not merely exploiting. The President correctly identified that undocumented migrants are employed precisely because their precarious legal status prevents them from asserting their rights. This is an important and often overlooked dimension of the migration debate: irregular migrants are frequently victims of economic exploitation, not its architects.

Our Concerns

 Alongside these welcome commitments, we wish to place the following concerns on the public record.

The political framing risks validating the narratives that drive xenophobia:

  • The address, while condemning xenophobia, simultaneously accepts the core premise of the anti-migrant mobilisation: that irregular migration is a significant driver of pressure on public services, unemployment, and social instability. The President stated that “illegal migration affects service delivery and places additional burdens on essential services.” He linked undocumented migration to organised crime, illegal mining, drugs, and money laundering. He acknowledged community “anger” about foreign nationals running spaza shops and informal businesses.
  • We do not dispute that the state has a legitimate interest in regulating immigration and enforcing its laws. Our concern is that these assertions — made without the qualification of evidential grounding, and in a political environment already inflamed by coordinated anti-migrant mobilisation — risk lending the authority of the presidency to narratives that, in practice, have produced intimidation, displacement, and violence against people who are in many cases lawfully present in South Africa and entitled to its protection.

A state that simultaneously condemns xenophobic violence and validates the political framing that produces it creates conditions in which the next outbreak of violence occurs without the political legitimacy required to prevent it. – Lawyers for Human Rights

  • We call on the President and the government to ensure that future engagements with migration are explicitly grounded in evidence: evidence about the actual contribution of foreign nationals to the South African economy, evidence about the proportion of service delivery failures attributable to migration versus domestic policy choices, and evidence about the documented role of undocumented migrants as economic victims rather than economic aggressors.

The address does not adequately address the failure to protect those who sought protection — the Durban case:

  • The address makes no reference to the events of 18 to 21 May 2026 in Durban, where hundreds of refugees and asylum seekers — overwhelmingly documented, overwhelmingly lawfully present in South Africa — sought police protection from xenophobic violence and were met with tear gas, rubber bullets, and Those same persons were subsequently transported by buses under police escort to the Durban Refugee Reception Office for collective “status verification”. of the approximately 300 to 460 persons processed, fewer than one percent were found to be undocumented.
  • A state commitment to exclusive state enforcement of immigration law carries credibility only if it is accompanied by a commitment to ensure that state enforcement is not conducted in response to vigilante pressure, in the absence of individualised legal grounds, and without the procedural safeguards required by the Constitution and the Immigration Act. The President’s address does not address this distinction.

The proposed relocation of refugee reception offices to border posts raises serious protection concerns:

  • The President announced a phased relocation of refugee reception centres to border posts, beginning with the Tshwane centre. We note this proposal with significant concern as LHR has done so previously in their submissions on the White Paper.
  • South Africa’s asylum system is already under severe strain. The Refugee Reception Offices in Pretoria, Cape Town, and Durban operate with enormous backlogs. Persons with valid asylum seeker permits are frequently unable to renew their documentation for months, through no fault of their own. The Constitutional Court and other courts have repeatedly found administrative failures in the asylum system to be constitutionally untenable.
  • We call on the government to engage meaningfully with civil society and affected communities before implementing any relocation of refugee reception infrastructure, and to commission a human rights impact assessment of the proposed model.

Corruption in the asylum system is the state’s own failure, not migrants:

  • The President correctly identified corruption as a significant enabler of irregular migration and committed to stamping it out. LHR strongly supports this commitment. However, we note that corruption in South Africa’s asylum and immigration system is not a peripheral problem: it is documented, systemic, and well-known to the state.
  • LHR has published a comprehensive report on corruption in South Africa’s asylum system, documenting how corruption by Department of Home Affairs officials — demanding bribes for the processing of asylum applications, for documentation renewals, and for access to officials has produced a system in which vulnerable people are forced to pay for rights they are legally entitled to receive for This corruption is not caused by migrants. It is perpetrated against them, by state officials, in a department that has received insufficient oversight, insufficient accountability measures, and insufficient investment in anti-corruption infrastructure.
  • Addressing corruption in the asylum and immigration system is not only a law enforcement It is a human rights protection imperative. We call on the government to acknowledge publicly that corruption in the Department of Home Affairs has been a primary driver of irregular documentation and documentation backlogs, and to invest in the systemic reforms necessary to address it.

The Employment Services Amendment Bill and labour quota proposals require careful human rights scrutiny:

  • The President announced that the Employment Services Amendment Bill — which empowers the Minister of Employment and Labour to set quotas on the employment of foreign nationals in any economic sector or occupational category — has been approved by Cabinet for introduction to Parliament. We note that employment quotas based on nationality raise complex questions of equality law, constitutional rights, and international labour standards that require careful and evidence-based consideration.
  • We will engage with the proposed legislation through the parliamentary process and calls on all relevant portfolio committees and broader stakeholders to ensure that the Bill is subject to rigorous public participation, including by affected migrant communities, labour organisations, employers, and human rights organisations.

What Genuine Protection of South Africa and Migrants Requires: What we ask of the government the following:

  • Act in protection of rights with the same vigour as immigration enforcement. A public ultimatum has been issued to migrants to leave South Africa by 30 June 2026. The government must publicly repudiate this deadline and take active steps to prevent violence and ensure the safety of This must be communicated not only by the President but by the Minister of Police, the National Commissioner of SAPS, and the Executive Mayors of Municipalities across South Africa
  • Ensure that immigration enforcement complies with the Constitution and the law. Collective operations targeting persons based on perceived nationality, conducted without individualised grounds, and without access to legal representation, are not lawful They are unconstitutional profiling. The government must issue clear operational directives to SAPS and the Department of Home Affairs that compliance with sections 9, 10, 12, and 33 of the Constitution and section 34 of the Immigration Act is non-negotiable.
  • Fix the asylum system before further restricting South Africa’s asylum system is failing not because of an absence of legal framework, but because the existing framework is administered corruptly, inefficiently, and with chronic under-resourcing. Before relocating reception infrastructure, before tightening access, before introducing new enforcement mechanisms, the government must address the known structural failures that leave documented refugees and asylum seekers functionally undocumented through no fault of their own.
  • Ground migration policy in evidence, not in political pressure. The government’s response to migration has been visibly accelerated by organised anti-migrant mobilisation. Policy developed in response to public pressure risks incorporating the politics of that pressure into the legal framework. Migration policy must be developed through evidence, constitutional compliance, and engagement with all stakeholders — including migrants and the civil society organisations that serve
  • Invest in access to justice for those subjected to immigration enforcement. Every person subjected to arrest, detention, or deportation under the Immigration Act has constitutional rights. The right to legal representation, the right to procedural fairness, the right not to be arbitrarily detained: these rights must be practically accessible, not merely formally We call on the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development to ensure that legal aid and independent monitoring are available to persons subjected to immigration enforcement operations.

The President has chosen to speak directly to the crisis unfolding in South Africa’s communities. For that, we are grateful. The commitments in his address, that immigration enforcement is a state function, that xenophobia has no place in South Africa, that human dignity and the Constitution must be upheld, are the right affirmations. They must be given operational content.

Words spoken from the Union Buildings reach communities in Durban, Johannesburg, Estcourt and beyond. They reach the formations that have driven people from their homes and told them they must leave by 30 June 2026. They reach the police officers who will decide, in the field, whether to open cases for foreign nationals who have been attacked. They reach the officials who will decide whether to conduct immigration operations under vigilante pressure or under constitutional norms.

“The measure of the President’s address will not be its language. It will be what happens on 30 June 2026, and the day after that, and the day after that.” – Lawyers for Human Rights

We remain committed to working constructively with the government toward a migration framework that is lawful, humane, evidence-based, and protective of all persons within South Africa’s borders. We remain equally committed to holding the government to account — through legal proceedings, advocacy, and public engagement — when that framework fails the people it is supposed to serve.

Ends,

For More information or enquiries please contact mpho@lhr.org.za and/ or sharone@lhr.org.za

Undersigned Organizations, Individuals, Groups, Movements and Communities:

  1. Lawyers for Human Rights
  2. Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa (SERI)
  3. Section 27
  4. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  5. Ubuntu Rural Women and Youth Movement
  6. Collective Voices for Health Access
  7. HIAS South Africa
  8. Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (ISLA)
  9. Wits Law Clinic
  10. Save Our Sacred Lands
  11. Neighbours NPO
  12. Ntirhisano Community Centre (NCC)
  13. South African Red Cross
  14. Inner City Resource Centre
  15. Centre for Faith and Community, University of Pretoria
  16. Equal Education Law Centre
  17. Helen Suzman Foundation
  18. Be True 2 Me
  19. Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC)
  20. Sophiatown Community Psychological Services
  21. Foundation for Human Rights
  22. International Labour Research and Information Group
  23. Dr Dale McKinley
  24. Tshwane Leadership Foundation
  25. People’s Health Movement South Africa
  26. Village of Hope
  27. Burundian Community and Diaspora in the Western Cape
  28. Congolese Civil Society of South Africa
  29. Karen Weissensee
  30. Union des Congolais d’Afrique du Sud (U.C.A.S)
  31. Walmer Estate Civic Association
  32. Burundian Women in South Africa for Development Initiate
  33. Orange Farm Human Rights Advice Office
  34. Institute for Justice and Reconciliation
  35. Worker World Media Production
  36. Gaudence Uwizeye
  37. Africa Unite
  38. Refugee Social Services
  39. Defend Our Democracy
  40. Urban Studios
Thank you for joining
Thank you for joining the LHR Newsletter, we will be in touch soon