From the news desk

Fate of protesting refugees at CPT Church hangs in balance as court decision gets postponed

Share this article

by Tauhierah Salie

Hopes of finding a resolution to the deteriorating living conditions of refugees staging a sit in at the central Methodist Church have once again been prolonged. The case between the City of Cape Town, the refugees and five other correspondents was postponed to next month.

Scattered groups of refugees gathered outside the Cape Town High Court on Tuesday, with “no more SA” written in bold letters on several placards. It represented the main call from refugees, who have demanded to be relocated to a different country citing continuous xenophobic attacks. They also allege ethnic discrimination in relation to education, employment and other basic services. The Department of Home Affairs (DHA) was also called out for not assisting them to obtain documentation.

The protest began in October where these demands put to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Public Order Police’s violent removal of the refugees from the UNHCR steps after three weeks of camping outside, resulted in global condemnation and saw headlines labeling the country as xenophobic.

Reverend Alan Story then opened the Church’s doors to the protesters, who seized the opportunity and filled it to capacity. He later came to regret his sympathetic gesture when they refused to leave.

Gradually, the number of refugees increased and extended to the area outside the church. An intense atmosphere of uncertainty clouded the church where an increasing number of make-shift shelters developed on the surrounding pavements

Unsanitary circumstances then prevailed, where the lack of sanitation facilities left pungent smells of urine and sweat in the air. Open fires were made in order to cook food or boil water to openly wash with in the streets, while cramped conditions raised fears of disease.

Concerns were also raised for the children, who are estimated to be around 200, for both their physical and educational well-being.

The progressively sordid conditions began negatively affecting the surrounding the businesses, including traders on the Green Market Square.

IMPASSE

Frequent collaborations between several role-players failed to reach an amicable point. In the first few weeks, the opposite prevailed and violent clashes between the refugees and stakeholders, intensified the need for a solution.

Meanwhile, their plight was thwarted by divisions in leadership. Confrontation between the Jean-Pierre Balousa- colloquially referred to as ‘JP’ – and Papy Sakumi drove a rift between the refugees and created two factions.  Both the leaders faced criminal charges for their actions at the height of protests in 2019.

In a meeting on Monday, mediated by the SAHRC’s Chris Nissan at Saint Georges Cathedral, UNHCR’s Miranda Gandeerse took centre stage. She addressed refugee representatives, religious groups (including the Muslim Judicial Council, clergy groups) and rights groups (including Right to Know, Friends of Abroad and More than Peace).

The spokesperson noted that, since October the UNHCR’s role in South Africa is to financially support local governments social and legal services for refugees. The three options the UNHCR primarily provide include: repatriation, where refugees are returned to their home country where it is established that it is safe to do so, local reintegration where efforts are made to ensure they are included in their communities and resettlement, which is only implemented in the most serious of cases and is used as a last resort.

Gandeerse noted that throughout negotiations, the validity of the refugee’s plight was not undermined and that the UNHCR remained committed to providing a solution. It stated that the only viable option was ‘voluntary reintegration’ one the refugees repeatedly rejected.

Among the signs that lay draped on the stairs of the Cape Town High court on Tuesday, which were also seen hanging along the church walls, epitomized the refugees feelings of insecurity:

“Reintegration will never stop xenophobic attacks in South Africa.”

“We are not going to back in the community because we don’t want to stay in South Africa anymore. Our lives still in danger. No more South Africa.”

“How are we going to be reintegrated when our brothers and sister are dying in Diepsloot. UNHCR please assist refugees.”

Gandeerse explained that the UNHCR will be unable to conduct assessments and process individual requests to repatriate and resettle protestors, without tainting the integrity of the necessary processes.

She explained that less than 1% of refugees, globally, get resettled. The spokesperson also pointed to the lack of refugee camps as in other countries such as Kenya, where there were 27,128 registered refugees and asylum seekers in 2019; and Uganda, which last week received more than 1,000 internally displaced people fleeing violence in the Ituri region.

“We need to maintain the integrity of resettlement process. We also invited constructive discussions (to find a solution) and refugee leaders rejected every single time. We have been open to constructive engagements for a solution-driven approach,” she said.

“We’ve heard reports that people have exchanged money and sex with leaders to get on the list for resettlement. (They) continue to use it as a tool when there is no list.”

Previously, the City’s Safety and Security Directorate spokesperson JP Smith said that while they are sensitive to the refugee’s situation, prioritizing the housing of the refugee protesters over those on the housing-waiting list amounts to cue jumping, which is untenable.

Smith’s name also appeared on one of the painted signs on the steps of the court, alongside the DA’s Helen Zille and Cape Town Mayor Dan Plato, labeling the trio as being ‘responsible for their (refugees) suffering.’

“Refugees have been sleeping here for more (than) 100 days, we don’t have issue with Home Affairs and UNHCR to come do there works here to help us”

“No more Corrupt UNHCR in South Africa”

“The City of Cape Town is stopping the UNHCR and the Home Affairs to do their mandate for refugees”

“As a child I am a victim because my parents are refugees. We are refugees in South Africa, we need you to come to our rescue.

The UNHCR joined the City, DHA, the SAHRC and the South African Police Service were among the structures in talks with the refugees and were also those cited in Tuesday’s court hearing.

LEGAL BATTLE

Before Acting Judge Daniel Thulari commenced court proceedings, a short scuffle led to the decision that Balousa will be representing the refugees. Despite being offered legal aid last year, Balousa insisted on representing himself. Although the 39-year-old is not officially qualified he has told VOC news that he had studied in the legal field.

Balousa restated the refugees claims and demands, accusing the City of being racist and misleading the court. He also requested the court investigate what he called a ‘suspicious’ letter they received which stated that a taxi will pick 20-30 refugees at a time and transport them to the Salt river hall where vetting will be done to allow them to obtain  documentation. The letter lacked a letter head and signature, which Balousa scoffed at.

It followed remarks by Advocate Con Joubert, who said that the current situation is unsustainable and that the provision of housing is not an option and that there aren’t funds to send them abroad.

The SAHRC’s Nissan also disputed Balousa’s claims of being corrupt and that he had been ‘colluding behind their (refugees) backs’.

Advocate Con Joubert reiterated the City’s request for an order to enforce its by-laws, stating that, should the interdict be granted, they should ‘go back to where they came from’. When questioned by Judge Thulari, Joubert stated that he does not mean they must be deported from South Africa but ‘go back to where they came from’ prior to protests. Among the bylaws which the refugees are in alleged contravention of include: Streets and Public Places By-law, the Integrated Waste Management By-law, the Environmental Health By-law, the Community Fire Safety By-law.

Home Affairs advocate Seth Nyathi said that, despite accusations of inefficiency, the department has agreed to assist with the verification and documentation processes. The City agreed to provide transport to facilitate this at the proposed venue of Salt River Hall. DHA turned down the initial proposal of having one in Sea Point and one in Maitland.

Judge Thulari likened a judgement in the City’s favour, while it lacks clarity on what will happen to those that do not have a suitable residence to return to, as one handed down during Apartheid.

Several parties stated that not all the refugee’s needs were the same. It was highlighted that only 68 refugees require documentation. Joubert questioned the logic in this, stating that there is a Home Affairs department within the CBD and that the onus is on each refugee to ‘make that effort’.

Judge Thulari also obliged Balousa request to have the matter postponed until after he returns from what he described as ‘human rights duties’ in Pretoria. Balousa defended the fact that he needs to be present to explain the judgement to the refugees in a way they understand, given that there are many mother-tongues among the 13 different nationalities.

Judgement is expected to be handed down on Monday, 17 Feb 2020.

VOC

 

 


Share this article

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

WhatsApp WhatsApp us
Wait a sec, saving restore vars.