WATCH – Non-South African children in South Africa often face difficulties in accessing documentation. This is not in the interests of the child – nor the South African state itself. Children born in South Africa to one or more foreign parents risk not having a birth certificate issued to them – despite the obligation on the South African government to do so.
We chat to Lena Opfermann, who recently completed her PhD research on the experiences and coping mechanisms of undocumented migrant youth in South Africa – using a theatre-based research method.
Keep up to date with our Teach-Yourself Series – condensed articles on current and planned changes in South African migration law. Our articles and infographics aim to spread awareness on South Africa’s migration landscape, and our standpoints on the issue. This is a joint initiative between The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town and Sonke Gender Justice. The first four topics in this series are: the Refugee Amendment Act, the White Paper on International Migration, birth registration and health care access.
Keep up to date with our Teach-Yourself Series – condensed articles on migration issues in South Africa. Our articles and infographics aim to spread awareness on South Africa’s migration landscape, and our standpoints on the issue. This is a joint initiative between The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town and Sonke Gender Justice and Lawyers for Human Rights. The first four topics in this series are: the Refugee Amendment Act, the White Paper on International Migration, birth registration and health care access.
[kc_row _id=”152004″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”484471″][kc_feature_box layout=”4″ title=”Refugee Amendment Act Infographic” position=”__empty__” desc=”VGhlIFJlZnVnZWUgQW1lbmRtZW50IEFjdCB3YXMgc2lnbmVkIGludG8gbGF3IG9uIDE0IERlY2VtYmVyIDIwMTcsIGJ1dCBjYW4gb25seSBiZSBwcm9wZXJseSBpbXBsZW1lbnRlZCBvbmNlIHRoZSBEcmFmdCBSZWd1bGF0aW9ucyBhcmUgZmluYWxpc2VkLiBUaGVyZSBpcyBjdXJyZW50bHkgbm8gdGltZSBmcmFtZSBmb3IgdGhpcy4gV2Ugc3VtbWFyaXNlIHRoZSBtYWluIGNoYW5nZXMgdGhhdCB0aGUgYWN0IHByb3Bvc2VzLiA=” show_button=”yes” button_text=”Download the infographic” button_link=”https://scalabrini.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Refugee-Amendment-Act-Explainer.pdf||_blank” _id=”935470″ css_custom=”{`kc-css`:{`any`:{`button`:{`color|.content-button a`:`#f2f2f2`,`background-color|.content-button a`:`#dd5226`}}}}” image=”4566″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”245155″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”695355″][kc_row_inner column_align=”middle” video_mute=”no” _id=”678097″][kc_column_inner width=”100%” _id=”616279″][kc_spacing height=”20″ _id=”934566″][kc_column_text _id=”293177″ css_custom=”{`kc-css`:{`any`:{`typography`:{`text-align|,p`:`justify`}}}}”]
Keep up to date with our Teach-Yourself Series – condensed articles on migration issues in South Africa. Our articles and infographics aim to spread awareness on South Africa’s migration landscape, and our standpoints on the issue. This is a joint initiative between The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town and Sonke Gender Justice and Lawyers for Human Rights. The first four topics in this series are: the Refugee Amendment Act, the White Paper on International Migration, birth registration and health care access.
Introduction
The Refugees Amendment Act, which was signed into law on 14 December 2017, can only be implemented once the Draft Regulations are finalised and published in the Government Gazette. At this time, it is still unclear when the Amendment Act will go into force – if at all.
As with any law in South Africa, public involvement is part of the process. The Advocacy Programme at the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town has provided the South African government with submissions on the Refugee Amendment Bill and comments on the Draft Regulations to the Refugees Amendment Act. In short, we are concerned that, by creating fundamental changes, this Act would infringe on the constitutional rights of asylum seekers and refugees in South Africa.
The Refugees Amendment Act is being enacted at a time of change in South African migration policy. the White Paper on International Migration for South Africa sets out a general blueprint for future migration policies, plans to add severe restrictions the refugee system (read more about it here). In this way, the Refugee Amendment Act seems to be ‘laying the groundwork’ for such changes.
Do you have further questions on the White Paper on International Migration? Please visit www.genderjustice.org.za, www.scalabrini.org.za, or contact lotte@scalabrini.org.za and get in touch!
The Refugees Amendment Act would lengthen the amount of time a refugee has resided in the country before being allowed to apply for certification to apply for permanent residence from the current five years to ten years. The UNHCR recommends that the period of time before recognising a permanent status should be five years. In our comments, we recommended that the time period remain at five years, especially considering the protracted determination process which means many remain on asylum temporary permits for many years, in order to qualify for application to permanent residency.
The fact that the Refugee Appeal Board is severely over-stretched and under-resourced is well documented, and has resulted in asylum seekers waiting for several years for hearings and outcomes. The Refugees Amendment Act would create the Refugee Appeals Authority, which would allow for one member to take a decision (rather than the current quorum) and for more flexible appointments. Scalabrini’s submissions agreed with some of the proposed improvements to the appeals procedure, and suggested an amnesty project to allow the Refugee Appeal Board to clear the huge backlog that they currently face.
The Refugees Amendment Act would, if implemented, expand the reasons under which a refugee status could be withdrawn. The Act, read with the Draft Regulations, propose a list of actions that would result in the withdrawal of refugee status – including ‘seeking consular services [and] assistance with documentation.’ In Scalabrini’s submissions and comments, concern is raised around the fact that asylum seekers are required, by the Department of Home Affairs, to produce documentation such as marriage certificates – which would require a visit to their consulate, and would risk them having their status withdrawn. The Act would allow the Minister of Home Affairs to announce a cessation upon an entire category of refugees (or an individual), which we highlight would bypass the checks and balances currently attached to cessations
If implemented, the Refugees Amendment Act would expand the reasons for which an asylum seeker could be excluded from refugee status. This would include the committing of a Schedule 2 crime, entering illegally into South Africa, or an offence related to fraudulent documentation. It would also include those who are fugitives from justice in countries ‘where the rule of law is upheld by a recognised judiciary’, and those who do not apply for asylum within five days of entering South Africa. These proposed changes do not adhere to international refugee law, which clearly outlines that refugees should not be penalised for irregular entry into South Africa. UNHCR Guidelines further clarify that ‘the proportionality of the gravity of the offence in question should be weighed against the consequences of exclusion for the individual concerned’.
Under the Refugees Amendment Act, an asylum claim will be considered ‘abandoned’ if an asylum seeker does not attend a Refugee Reception Office in the month after the expiry of their asylum permit (unless they have a ‘compelling reason’). In our experience, the expired permit process has been fraught with difficulty for asylum seekers for years and pushes individuals into undocumented statuses. Entering Refugee Reception Offices is no easy task; asylum seekers have to visit Refugee Reception Offices several times before getting documented. For these reasons, many asylum seekers would have their claim deemed ‘abandoned’ – which, in our opinion, places administrative matters over protection and the principle of non-refoulement and is in contradiction to South African case-law which confirms that asylum applications cannot be denied on grounds of delay and that asylum applicants are, even prior to applying, protected by the Refugees Act. Scalabrini’s submissions suggested twelve months given the practical realities as a more realistic period before considering an asylum claim abandoned.
The Refugees Amendment Act requires an asylum seeker to report to a Refugee Reception Office no later than five days after arriving in South Africa – or they can be excluded from refugee status. Furthermore, those who do not have an ‘asylum transit visa’ will be interviewed by an immigration officer to determine whether they have ‘valid reasons’ for not holding this transit visa. In the daily work of Scalabrini, asylum applicants often report difficulties in entering a Refugee Reception Office and applying for asylum. Five days to apply for asylum is not realistic – and we expressed concern in the submissions that denying someone an application to asylum simply because they apply on the sixth day is not in line with international refugee law. Given the current backlogs and protracted adjudication processes, this provision could create significant burdens for asylum seekers – and extra layers of administration for the Department of Home Affairs.
Under the Refugees Amendment Act asylum seekers will have to declare all existing dependents family upon their first application in order to have them documented in their asylum file. For those fleeing conflicts in stressful conditions, and with limited English, ensuring all family members are on the asylum application is not necessarily simple. In the submissions, we suggested that family members can be joined into an asylum file at a later date, along with proof of their relationship to the applicant.
Under the Refugees Amendment Act, the Director-General of Home Affairs would be able to establish, and disestablish, as many Refugee Reception Offices as he or she regards as necessary – ‘notwithstanding the provisions of any other law’. He or she would also be able to direct any category of asylum seekers to report to any ‘place specially designated’ when lodging an application for asylum. In Scalabrini’s submissions, concerns were around what an ‘other place specially designated’ might mean. We are especially concerned that it may result in what may essentially be de facto refugee camps or detention centres for certain categories of asylum seekers. Home Affairs has closed several Refugee Reception Offices since 2010, all of which were found unlawful by the courts. The laws with which opening or closing Refugee Reception Offices must comply with is not clear in the Refugees Amendment Act. This is of concern to us – especially considering the recent rulings on RRO closures. This amendment might well be paving the way towards the plans to ultimately construct ‘asylum processing centres’ on the northern borders of South Africa.
Under the Refugees Amendment Act, asylum seekers would no longer have the automatic right to work and study. This right would only be ‘endorsed’ on an asylum visa following an assessment process to determine whether the applicant could support themselves in any way (including with UNHCR’s support). If not, they would have the right to work endorsed – but they would need to show proof of employment within two weeks in order to remain with this right. If a workplace does not provide this proof of the asylum seeker’s employment, the employer can face a hefty fine. For those who are studying, the Refugees Amendment Act and Draft Regulations are not completely clear. Proof of studying at a South African education institution will be needed by asylum applicant, implying that the right to study will not be automatically granted.
In Scalabrini’s submissions, deep concerns were raised over the changes to asylum seekers’ right to work and study. The Watchenuka court case in 2003 confirmed asylum seekers’ right to work in South Africa, in that the right to work is interwoven with one’s constitutional right to dignity. The Refugees Amendment Act, it seems, would risk infringing rights to dignity once again. We are concerned that this system, if implemented, will be unworkable, impractical, and will lead to the degradation of asylum seekers’ dignity. What’s more, the UNHCR has confirmed that they are not able to provide shelter to asylum seekers in South Africa – despite the Act envisaging that the UNHCR would do so. The submissions also warned that employers will be hesitant to provide written undertakings (or risk fines), pushing applicants towards informal or unauthorised employment – which is neither beneficial for the asylum seeker nor the South African economy. The administrative process that will be needed to authorise an asylum seekers’ right to work would add further layers to the asylum system, creating more work for officials working in Home Affairs – who should be focusing their time and resources on processing asylum claims. We believe that, if the Department of Home Affairs is able to adjudicate asylum applications within a reasonable period of time, the need to ‘endorse’ asylum seekers’ right to work would fall away. We recommend that the Department of Home Affairs rather funnel resources towards improving efficient asylum adjudications.
[/kc_column_text][/kc_column_inner][/kc_row_inner][/kc_column][/kc_row]
Keep up to date with our Teach-Yourself Series – condensed articles on current and planned changes in South African migration law. Our articles and infographics aim to spread awareness on South Africa’s migration landscape, and our standpoints on the issue. This is a joint initiative between The Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town and Sonke Gender Justice. The first four topics in this series are: the Refugee Amendment Act, the White Paper on International Migration, birth registration and health care access.
For further information about the issues discussed in the series, contact lotte@scalabrini.org.za or you can visit www.genderjustice.org.za.
1. Introduction
The White Paper on International Migration was released in July 2017. This Paper sets out the framework for future immigration law in South Africa. Prior to a White Paper, a Green Paper is released, for which we wrote submissions. Green and White Papers form part of the process of law-making in South Africa.
This White Paper sets out major policy changes including:
The White Paper acknowledges that migration can help South Africa reach its National Development Plan goals, but it also links migration strongly to security risks, trafficking and corruption. In our submissions, we warn that an over-emphasis on the criminality of migration misrepresents most migrants living in South Africa, and reinforces the ever-growing securitisation of migration.
2. Our General Stance on the White Paper
We welcome the White Paper’s philosophy of linking migration to development. We also welcome the moves towards more mobility in the SADC region and African continent. At the same time, we are concerned that the White Paper fixates on the link between migrants and criminality, and makes provision only for ‘designer migrants’ – those who are economically established and highly skilled – which can result in a regional brain-drain and uneven regional development.
We have deep and grave concerns around the changes to the asylum system in South Africa, which we believe will result in unconstitutional ‘camps’ on the borders, where thousands of asylum seekers will risk having their most fundamental human rights abused.
More generally, the terms used in the White Paper (such as ‘illegal migrant’ rather than ‘undocumented person’) contributes to the unnecessary criminalization of migrants. We are also concerned at the White Paper’s lack of referencing sources, as it makes claims that are not linked to research or statistics.
African continent
The White Paper takes a pan-African stance, which seeks to move away from the colonial legacies of previous migration policies. The Paper references the AU Agenda 2063, which calls for the abolishment of visa requirements for all African citizens. The White Paper aims for visa-free travel for African citizens (i.e., the ability to enter South Africa for ninety days upon arrival at South Africa’s borders). This would, however, only work if there are return agreements and security measures in place. ‘Trusted travelers’ from Africa will be able to access long-term, multiple-entry visas. The White Paper plans for a fully automated visa application system (for all migrants), whereby applications are made in countries of origin, and are subject to advanced security checks using improved data systems.
Southern African Development Community Region
The Southern African Development Community (SADC) has aimed to work towards the free movement of people, goods and capital through various non-binding protocols. In reality, most of the SADC member states have not amended their policies in line with these protocols – and the White Paper stresses that, as the region’s largest economy, South Africa’s realization of this goal is difficult. The White Paper finds that 88% of recent deportations from South Africa were to Mozambique, Zimbabwe or Lesotho. With this in mind, the White Paper proposes the implementation of the following, which would include foreigners already living in South Africa:
Special Dispensation Permits have already been issued to certain groups of nationals in South Africa. These are temporary permits that allow certain work/study rights, but offer no pathway to permanent residency. These special permits are implemented through bilateral agreements between South Africa and another country. For example, the Zimbabwean special permit, which was first issued in 2014, offered temporary documentation to the mass influx of Zimbabweans during the economic crash. This permit has been extended three times (the current permits expire in 2021). Other special dispensation permits have been issued to Lesotho nationals and Angolan nationals.
These options would include a special work visa, a trader visa and Small Medium Enterprise Visa. These visas would be dependent on bilateral agreements with South Africa and sending countries, and would be subject to requirements, such as business registration, SARS registration and so on. These visas would not link into permanent residency.
In our submissions, we welcomed and celebrated these regularization projects, and the creation of a visa scheme for SADC citizens to legally enter, depart, and conduct employment and business in South Africa. We also agree with the White Paper that this will lift huge numbers out of the asylum system, providing relief and allow the asylum system to function (which means the huge changes planned to the asylum system would not be needed).
However, we also note some concerns on the SADC permit plans. Namely,
Although a step in the right direction, these ‘special’ permits are selective in who can apply, and when – resulting in a relatively small number of foreigners being documented rather than allowing for fuller SADC migration. It is not clear how low-skilled migrants could benefit from these permits, and risks allowing only ‘designer migrants’ to apply, resulting in brain-drains in sending countries. In the long term, we would support the development of an alternative migration management regime that would lessen the need for special dispensations.
The White Paper wants to change the way permanent residency and citizenship are granted. The White Paper wants to de-link temporary residency and refugee status leading to permanent residency all together. The White Paper also wants to de-link permanent residency leading to citizenship.
Instead, it plans to provide:
In our submissions, we expressed concern around de-linking refugee status and permanent residency. Permanent residency is currently only granted to refugees who, after careful assessment, are considered to be in ‘indefinite’ need of protection as they are fleeing conflict or persecution that shows no sign of reconciling. According to the White Paper itself, between 2014 and 2016, only 4% of permanent residency applications were made by those with refugee status. Currently, the application to permanent residency via refugee status is an elongated, and careful procedure – and as such does not constitute a ‘pull factor’ for refugees coming to South Africa, as the White Paper claims.
The White Paper plans fundamental changes to the South African asylum system, which has caused deep concern within civil society.
Why the White Paper wants to change the asylum system
The White Paper finds the current asylum system to be overburdened, under-funded and non-functioning. Asylum adjudications take years, and many asylum-seekers hold expired documentation. On this basis, the White Paper plans to overhaul the asylum system.
In our opinion, the challenges faced in the asylum system do not warrant a change in law. These challenges are challenges of implementation, communication, and commitment. For example, many asylum seeker hold expired permits not through a fault of their own, but because they cannot access Refugee Reception Offices (RROs), or their permits are simply stamped on the back rather than properly extended.
In a move towards an encampment system, the White Paper lays down plans to construct Asylum Seeker Processing Centres on South Africa’s northern borders. We have expressed deep concern about this proposal. We believe these Processing Centers would be seriously detrimental to the rights and realities of asylum seekers, refugees and South Africans alike. We fear that creating detention centres in remote areas of the country will result in the long-term detention of vulnerable people without adequate support or adequate conditions. Such detention is unconstitutional and contrary to international law. Aside from being expensive, research shows that encampment policies do not deter migration – and could cause resentment from local South African citizens.
We believe that we should concentrate on improving the current system – with a better resourced and effectively managed asylum system based on the current Refugees Act of 1998. With the strain of regional economic migrants removed from the asylum system (through the new SADC visas), these improvements would be possible.
In general, it seems that asylum seekers will be ‘accommodated’ at the Asylum Processing Centre while their asylum claim is being considered. The White Paper explains that governmental departments and international organisations (UNHCR, Red Cross) will operate at the Processing Centre. Vulnerable asylum seekers will be provided with special services at the Processing Centre.
It seems that ‘low-risk’ asylum seekers can leave the Processing Centre (it is not clear what constitutes ‘low-risk’) into the care of organisations or community members. It is assumed that asylum-seekers who are granted refugee status will leave the Processing Centre. Asylum seekers will not have the automatic right to work. Their basic needs will be catered for in the processing centre. In exceptional cases, the right to work might be granted to certain asylum seekers.
As above mentioned, we are deeply worried by the move towards detention centres on the northern borders, which we fear will result in the detention of asylum seekers, which is contrary to their constitutional right to freedom of movement. We are deeply concerned that the Department of Home Affairs will struggle to run a Processing Centre in a remote area away from public scrutiny.
We raised deep concerns around the changes to asylum seekers’ ability to work, as the Watchenuka court case confirmed asylum seekers’ right to work in South Africa, in that it is interwoven with one’s constitutional right to dignity. We advocate for the continuation of asylum seekers’ right to work in South Africa.
Funding the Asylum Processing Centres
It is not clear who will bear the cost of the Asylum Seeking Processing Centres. The White Paper acknowledges that ‘Additional … will be required’ for the Processing Centres, and indicated that Home Affairs is ‘developing a business case’ for the funding of the White Paper’s implementation.
We are concerned that, aside from the implications on human rights, Processing Centres will be an expensive venture. Similar asylum camps elsewhere are expensive to run ($224 dollars per day per person in the US). Aside from running costs, Home Affairs will have to set aside sizeable budgets for litigation on unlawful detention. Home Affairs indicated that the UNHCR will be implicated in supporting costs for changes to the asylum system. However, the UNHCR specifically confirmed they would not be able to fund such programmes in South Africa. In our submissions, we advocated that governmental funds should rather be spent on running the current asylum system properly, reopening RROs and training staff. This, paired with less asylum applicants (due to SADCV visa regime) will result in a functioning asylum system.
The basis upon which refugees can be excluded will be expanded to include applicants that have failed to apply in safe countries en route to South Africa, often termed ‘third safe countries’.
We find that this cannot be legally implemented in South Africa. The principle of ‘third safe countries’ is not considered legal practice under international law. Under the Refugees Act of South Africa, those who have been granted refugee status in other countries cannot be granted refugee status in South Africa. But those who have merely transited through countries on their way to South Africa cannot be denied status based on their route taken to reach South Africa. Returning people to countries where they might be at risk of harm, or deportation, has been protected against – both by the Refugees Act (Section 2) and by South African caselaw.
Those with refugee status will no longer be able to access permanent residency, but they might be able to access the long-term residency visa. As above mentioned, those refugees applying to permanent residency are subject to a thorough process.
We are of the belief that, for those refugees who can never return home, permanent residency is an appropriate durable solution.
6. Other Provisions of the White Paper
The White Paper also includes provisions, to which our submissions did not reply. This included better managing ties with South African expatriates, and improved integration systems for international migrants in South Africa (such as legal advice desks).
For highly skilled migrants from other continents than Africa, the White Paper sets out a points-based system. Skilled migrants will be considered in terms of their skills, investments and qualifications. This will be tied to a critical skills list. Migrants with critical skills will be able to apply for a long-term family residence visa, and international students will be able to access residency after graduation. Where skilled migrants are granted residency, schemes must be deployed to transfer skills to local South Africans, such as through understudy programmes.
7. Children and the White Paper
Both the Green and White Papers on International Migration fail to mention the specific needs of migrant and refugee children. In response to this, joint submissions were lodged focusing solely on children’s issues. Migrant children have severe trouble accessing documentation options in South Africa. No systems exist to record entry of migrating children and therefore the number of undocumented children in SA is entirely unknown. Children born in South Africa to foreign parents are facing increasing difficulties in accessing birth certificates.
The White Paper does not mention children specifically (only in the family visa for highly skilled migrants). ‘Vulnerable groups’ will be held in the Asylum Processing Centre, which might include asylum-seeking children. Accordingly, we stress in our submissions that the detention of children should only be used as a last resort and if so, for the shortest possible period of time. This is set down in international and national law. Again, it would seem that Asylum Seeking Processing Centres would therefore be unconstitutional and contrary to international law. We urged, in our submissions, that the White Paper include a special permit for migrant children and ensure that data systems exist to understand the number of children in South Africa, including express provisions to issue birth certificates to all children born in South Africa, regardless of their parents’ nationality. None of these submissions were considered in the White Paper.
Contact Us
Do you have further questions on the White Paper on International Migration? Please visit www.genderjustice.org.za or www.scalabrini.org.za and get in touch!
[kc_row _id=”973232″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”991672″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”792830″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4497″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”235356″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”788333″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”193685″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4499″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”828070″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”982703″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”462334″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4500″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”537111″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”807579″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”327077″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4502″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”825992″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”518857″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”581507″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4503″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”69159″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”46246″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”822953″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4504″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”454966″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”836351″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”371351″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4505″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”446″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”193623″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”674396″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4506″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”223720″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”758287″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”40616″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4507″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”753561″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”939269″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”959259″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4508″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”944391″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”720725″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”687945″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4509″][/kc_column][/kc_row][kc_row _id=”133449″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”579681″][kc_single_image image_size=”full” _id=”749701″ image_source=”media_library” image=”4510″][/kc_column][/kc_row]
How can we address xenophobia in an innovative, relevant way? Abdi, Western Cape head of the Somali Association of South Africa, recognizes that Somali shop-keepers’ entrepreneurial spirit is a ‘way of life’. At the same time, he sees that xenophobic tensions have roots in the South African economy itself. In reaction, Abdi started a Spaza Business Course, in which Somali shop-owners and South African entrepreneurs share business skills, tips and tricks of the trade.
[kc_row use_container=”yes” _id=”969923″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”610951″][kc_spacing height=”20″ _id=”964915″][kc_feature_box layout=”4″ title=”Scalabrini Annual Report 2018 – 2019″ position=”Report” desc=”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” show_button=”yes” button_text=”Read full report” button_link=”https://scalabrini.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Scalabrini_Centre_Cape_Town_Annual_Report_2018_2019-1.pdf||_blank” _id=”72264″ image=”1625″ css_custom=”{`kc-css`:{`any`:{`image`:{`width|.content-image`:`60px`}}}}”][/kc_column][/kc_row]
[kc_row use_container=”yes” _id=”739133″][kc_column width=”12/12″ video_mute=”no” _id=”477268″][kc_spacing height=”20″ _id=”352006″][kc_feature_box layout=”4″ title=”Foreign Children in Care Comparative Report South Africa 2019″ position=”Research” desc=”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” show_button=”yes” button_text=”Read full report” button_link=”https://scalabrini.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Scalabrini_Centre_Cape_Town_Foreign_Children_in_Care_Comparative_Report_South_Africa_2019.pdf||_blank” _id=”469810″ image=”1625″ css_custom=”{`kc-css`:{`any`:{`image`:{`width|.content-image`:`60px`}}}}”][/kc_column][/kc_row]
