Reflections on the possible implications of using the term ‘illegal foreigner’ or ‘illegal immigrant’ in South Africa’s immigration policies.
Photo credit Daily Maverick: (Photo: Gallo Images / Die Burger / Jaco Marais)
People living in the Bellville and Maitland refugee camps on 29 April 2021 in Cape Town, South Africa.
Migration is a familiar concept in African societies with historical roots tracing back to the nomadic lifestyle of early communities known as hunters and gatherers. Today, migration is made up of three components, and these include the migrant, the country of origin, and the country of destination.
Migrants move from their home countries for various reasons including but not limited to seeking employment, escaping poverty, evading political unrest, and seeking refuge from natural disasters. Although motivations differ, migrants must comply with applicable immigration laws; otherwise, their stay in host states is considered illegal.
South Africa has seen a vast influx of migrants due to the country’s advanced infrastructure and economy, resulting in an extended pattern of illegal migration into the country. The South African government has laid down immigration policies under the purview of the Immigration Act 13 of 2002. Section 9 of this Act mandates that all individuals must utilise authorised entry points and possess valid passports when entering or exiting the country. Failure to meet these requirements often results in the classification of migrants as “illegal foreigners.” This article analyses the possible implications of using the term "illegal foreigner" to refer to people who enter the country unlawfully.
According to Mila Paspalanova, despite the long existence of undocumented migration, no common phrase is used to refer to unauthorised foreign nationals. Various governments and researchers use different terminologies; for example, terms such as "illegal migrants", "illegal foreigners", and "undocumented foreigners" are used. However, it must be noted that using the term "illegal foreigner" or "illegal migrants" when describing an individual who entered the country illegally has negative connotations that can fuel stigmatisation, discrimination, and violations of human rights.
‘[A] critical assessment of the terminology applied to foreign nationals who enter South Africa illegally is crucial. The classification of these individuals as "illegal foreigners" contributes to their alienation by the community, because they are not seen as people but as illegal’.
Notably, the South African context has witnessed recurring instances of xenophobic attacks, partly fueled by the portrayal of migrants as criminals or threats to the community. By designating migrants as "illegal," this narrative contributes to perpetuating these negative perceptions.
South Africa is regarded as the most hostile destination in the world for African migrants. In 2008, an attack against foreign nationals resulted in the death of sixty-two people. Again in 2014, Somalian nationals were attacked, and two of them were stoned to death. In 2019, twelve foreign nationals were murdered during a riot. Furthermore, last year, members of Operation Dudula went around Hillbrow looking for shops with foreign national employees and harassed them. All these incidents are indicative of how citizens view foreign nationals.
Thus, a critical assessment of the terminology applied to foreign nationals who enter South Africa illegally is crucial. The classification of these individuals as "illegal foreigners" contributes to their alienation by the community, because they are not seen as people but as illegal. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) stated that a human being can never be illegal; therefore, it is inaccurate to refer to them as such. The IOM further argued that the term carries a criminal connotation that is offensive to the dignity of the immigrant and jeopardizes respect for their human rights.
Thus, another consequence arising from the use of the term "illegal foreigner" is the tendency to view and treat this group as criminals. This results in foreigners being unjustly attributed the blame for the crimes committed in the country; for example, in 2022, a group of women were sexually assaulted, and the community assumed that the “illegal foreigners” were the perpetrators without any investigation being conducted.
The adverse consequences of the term "illegal foreigner" extend beyond perceptions. During the COVID-19 pandemic, undocumented foreign nationals encountered barriers to accessing essential services, including food and healthcare, due to their lack of legal status. For instance, in order to receive government aid in the form of food parcels, one was supposed to produce a national identity card . As a result, foreign nationals who were illegally present in the country were not eligible to receive the package.
Furthermore, in 2022 the MEC of the Health sector of Limpopo, Dr. Phophi Ramathuba, informed a foreign national seeking medical attention that she was straining the medical resources, which were meant for citizens and documented people in Limpopo. Implying in other words that undocumented persons are not entitled to health care. This illustrates how undocumented foreign nationals are perceived and are not treated with dignity.
In 1975, the UN General Assembly Resolution advised UN bodies to refrain from using the term "illegal foreigners" to refer to people whose presence is illegal in the country. The General Assembly suggested they refer to them as non-documented or irregular migrant workers.
Therefore, it can be submitted that the use of the term “illegal foreigners” in South African immigration policies and the media results in irregular foreign nationals being treated in an undignified manner. It is recommended that the South African government amend the Immigration Act and replace “illegal” with words such as “irregular”, “non-documented,” or “undocumented”. Such a replacement would promote the recognition of undocumented foreign nationals as human beings worthy of respect and dignity.
