Making Asylum Seekers More Vulnerable in South Africa: The Negative Effects of Hostile Asylum Policies on Livelihoods
| Published date | 01 October 2021 |
| Author | Sergio Carciotto |
| Date | 01 October 2021 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12788 |
Making Asylum Seekers More Vulnerable in
South Africa: The Negative Effects of Hostile
Asylum Policies on Livelihoods
Sergio Carciotto*
ABSTRACT
In post-apartheid South Africa, migration policies and legislation have left critical issues such
as social cohesion and integration unsolved. Furthermore, the inability to reconcile the national
interest of maintaining borders’integrity with respecting moral and legal obligations has
placed the asylum system under tremendous stress. Drawing from secondary sources, as well
as qualitative interviews, this paper explores the development of new asylum policies aimed at
curtailing asylum seekers’right to work in South Africa. The study’sfindings provide support
for the conclusions of earlier research that highlights the consequences of hostile policies and
practices for asylum seekers’livelihoods. The author argues that curtailments on asylum seek-
ers’right to work will have many possible socio-economic ramifications. In the immediate
term, the legislation seeks to inhibit asylum seekers from engaging in self-employment, while
in the long run it may achieve the undesired effect of producing more precarious forms of
livelihood.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, South Africa’s migration policy has become increasingly geared towards height-
ened security and containment. In many respects, this development aligns with the globalization of
migration control, reflecting a trend towards more restrictive policies and practices both in the Glo-
bal South and the Global North. The rationale behind is that it is necessary for states to prevent
undocumented economic migrants from reaching their territories. Furthermore, developed states
believe it is imperative to remove perceived “pull factors,”such as the right to seek employment,
which are assumed to draw illegitimate asylum seekers
1.
. This has given rise to policies that not
only seek to “exclude asylum seekers territorially, but also socially and economically”(Mayblin,
2016:194).
In South Africa, such changes are reflected in the 2017 White Paper on International Migration
for South Africa (the White Paper) which was issued to guide a comprehensive review of the coun-
try’s immigration and asylum policy. In order to be implemented, policy provisions will require
necessary legislative changes which the government aims at completing during its medium-term
strategic framework (2019–2024). Within this context, the 2017 Refugees Amendment Act (the
*Institute for Development Studies, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
The paper is containing original research and has not been submitted earlier in any journal and is not being considered
for publication elsewhere.
doi: 10.1111/imig.12788
©2020 The Author
International Migration ©2020 IOM
International Migration Vol. 59 (5) 2021
ISSN 0020-7985Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Amendment Act) comprises the first major change to South Africa’s refugee policy since the 1998
Refugees Act (the Refugees Act) was passed twenty years ago. The Amendment Act was signed
into law in December 2017, while its Regulations were published in the Government Gazette in
December 2019. These Regulations introduced changes to the definition of a “dependant,”condi-
tions for the withdrawal of refugee status, banning of refugees from participation in political activi-
ties, and the determination of sectors within which asylum seekers are not permitted to work
(Department of Home Affairs, 2019). But, above all, the Amendment Act establishes new measures
to deter asylum seekers from entering the country by curtailing their economic rights and inhibiting
their ability to seek protection. Central to these changes are new limitations on asylum seekers’
right to work while awaiting final determination of their refugee claim, a process that currently
takes years to complete (Kavuro, 2015; Schockaert, et al., 2020). These provisions are triggered as
a result of the negative perception of immigrants in general, and asylum seekers in particular,
amongst public officials and policy makers. This perception is exemplified by a statement by the
former Deputy Minister of Home Affairs who stated, “many people who seek asylum in South
Africa are actually economic migrants who use the asylum seeker process to avoid applying for a
visa under the Immigration Act,”thus emphasizing an intent to circumvent the law (Chohan,
2014).
The provisions of the Act are unclear when it comes to asylum seekers’right to self-employment
but a restrictive reading could construe the Amendment Act as barring asylum seekers from engag-
ing in any self-employment activities. Asylum seekers in South Africa face several challenges in
accessing wage-earning employment, particularly in the formal sector, and are forced towards inse-
cure jobs in the informal sectors of the economy. The documentation issued to both asylum seekers
and refugees poses problems for those seeking formal employment and has been referred to as “dis-
abling,”as it is subject to tears and folds and is not recognized by employers and law enforcement
officials (Belvedere, 2007:58). The disabling documentation, as well as the inconsistent access to
and temporary nature of it, has effectively pushed asylum seekers to the margins of economic activ-
ity despite their entitlement to access labour markets is similar to citizens. Their condition of limi-
nal legality exposes them to insecurity, vulnerability and a greater risk of social exclusion.
Consequently, many are forced into “opting out”of state regulatory frameworks, creating parallel,
informal structures for economic activity and protection (Kihato, 2007). Moreover, their involve-
ment in informal activities and street trade is characterized by both a “lack of legal recognition and
protection, extreme vulnerability and dependence on opaque institutional arrangements and ephem-
eral survival strategies”(Schierup, 2016:1060).
Numerous studies have sought to investigate the deterioration of asylum seekers’livelihoods in
South Africa due to unfavourable policies and practices. Crush and Skinner (2017) concluded that
measures to limit asylum seekers’righttowork and logistic and administrative barriers, aim at
making South Africa an undesirable destination for refugees. Similarly, Crush and McCordic
(2017) argued that restrictive employment policies force asylum seekers to pursue a livelihood in
the informal sector. Other studies (see, e.g. Hunter and Skinner, 2003; Kavuro, 2015; Peberdy,
2016, 2017; Crush et al., 2015, 2017a, 2017b; Gastrow, 2018) discussed at length the effects of
contradictory policy environment on the exclusion of migrants from participation in both the formal
and informal sectors of the economy. However, no empirical research has yet examined the possi-
ble socio-economic implications of the recently enacted Amendment Act for asylum seekers and
their livelihoods. This research seeks to address this knowledge gap and to extend the literature on
exclusionary asylum policy by suggesting that limitations of the right to work and self-employment
may lead to further insecurity, marginalization and social exclusion.
This article is based on a review of existing literature, as well as qualitative interviews and focus
group interviews. In July 2018, two focus group interviews were conducted in Cape Town to better
understand views, experiences and perspectives of refugees and asylum seekers. The first focus
group involved only female participants to better understand the specific social and economic
4Carciotto
©2020 The Author. International Migration ©2020 IOM
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations