Skip to content

“South Africa belongs to all who live in it”, COVID-19 showed it does not

Failure to address the needs of the most vulnerable will hasten the infection rate and flame the fires of xenophobia, already too well known in South Africa.

“South Africa belongs to all who live in it”, COVID-19 showed it does not
Students going to school in Johannesburg - South Africa, 8 June 2020 | Picture by Itumeleng English/African news Agency/RealTime Images/ABACA/PA Images. All rights reserved
Published:

The Constitution of South Africa unequivocally states ‘South Africa belongs to all who live in it’. The government declared a state of disaster on 15 March 2020 and imposed a lockdown from 20 March. Human rights groups and activists criticised the stringent measures taken by the South African government, especially in relation to migrants. One of the first measures the government undertook to combat the spread of the virus was to erect a 40km fence on the border with Zimbabwe.

The excessive cost and futile endeavour was highly criticised, especially in a country regarded as the most economically unequal in the world, and where resources could be effectively utilised. The government immediately closed 35 of its 72 ports of entry in an effort to control the spread of the virus. The threat of COVID-19 ‘migrating’ across remains high as borders in southern Africa are notoriously porous. Border closures do not mean that people stop traversing borders, it simply escalates the hidden networks that perpetuate undocumented border crossings (Rugunanan, 2016). Closing the borders goes against the idea of a borderless Africa and inclusivity.

The challenges faced by irregular migrants in South Africa are exacerbated under lockdown conditions and are decidedly anti-migrant. At the start of the lockdown period, some refugee reception offices, notorious for being corrupt, were either closed or stopped receiving new asylum applications until staff received protective measures. For asylum seekers, unable to renew their existing permits, meant their bank accounts were frozen. With no access to funds, they would not be able to buy food, receive health services, and provide for basic needs. In a time of lockdown, their vulnerabilities are heightened.