Xenophobia: briefings by Departments of Foreign and Home Affairs

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
27 October 2004
XENOPHOBIA: BRIEFINGS BY DEPARTMENTS OF FOREIGN AND HOME AFFAIRS

Chairperson: Ms H Mpaka (ANC)

Documents handed out:
The United Nations human rights system
The United Nations system-Principal organs of the United Nations
National Forum against Racism
Progress Reports on Implementation of Durban Declaration

SUMMARY
The Department of Foreign Affairs briefed the Committee on developments that had taken place in South Africa and in the international arena as far as the phenomenon of xenophobia was concerned and on the work that was still to be done in this regard. The presentation highlighted the domestic situation and the progress made by South Africa in dealing with this scourge as well as the prominent role that South Africa played in coming to grips with it on an international level.

The Department of Home Affairs gave feedback on their progress in combating discrimination against migrants and refugees. The Department of Justice related how the National Forum against Racism had been established to fulfil the task of formulating a National Action Plan, as per the instructions of the Durban Declaration.

MINUTES
Mr P Montwedi, Acting Director: Human Rights at the Department of Foreign Affairs, said that since it was the aim of the Department to promote South African foreign policy and to manage international relations, it would be from this perspective that xenophobia would be approached. The Department worked within the framework of the Commission on Human Rights, co-ordinated by the Commissioner for Human Rights based in Geneva and considered the centre for Human Rights. Since South Africa's return to the international arena in 1997, it had been a member of the Commission and had played a major role in shaping the international Human Rights agenda.

Mr Montwedi said that South Africa had also hosted the third World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances in Durban in 2001. The first two conferences in 1978 and 1983 had dealt mostly with the demise of the apartheid system and other forms of institutionalised racism in Southern Africa. He said that the democratic elections of 1994 signalled the end of institutionalised racism in Southern Africa. The world had begun to focus on other forms of racism, such as xenophobia and related intolerances. The last included religious intolerance, the rise in anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. The World Conference in Durban had directed states to take legislative, administrative and judicial measures to eliminate xenophobia. In South Africa this required the alignment of our domestic legislation, resulting in the promulgation of the new Immigration Act. The Act made discrimination against foreigners illegal. Mr Montwedi pointed out that xenophobia is defined as a deep-rooted dislike of foreigners. Previously migrants and refugees had experienced discrimination in their attempts to obtain employment, education and housing, amongst others. Some of these cases had landed in court. Since the promulgation of the Act, training of those responsible for administering and implementation of the Act had occurred. The challenge was to take the spirit of the Conference forward.

Mr Montwedi said South Africa had to report to the international system on how the country was performing in the implementation of the outcome of that conference, which had been encapsulated by the Durban Declaration and the Programme of Action. The Minister of Justice decided to launch a National Forum against Racism, providing a national framework within which all national stakeholders can interface. It would also be the launching pad for the National Action Plan, as required per the declaration from all states. The plan would focus on racism, xenophobia and related intolerance. Once this plan has been produced and adopted it would be lodged with the UN General Assembly. The Department of Justice and Constitutional Development would lead the way in this regard.

The UN system contained three monitoring teams, which consisted of Committees. The International Convention for the Elimination of all Forms of Racism was the instructive document on racism and xenophobia on the international level. The Committee dealing with this was the Committee on the Elimination of Racism and Discrimination. The Minister of Justice had produced a report, which had been forwarded to the UN and was in the process of being translated. The Minister of Justice would be presenting this report to this Committee. Other treaties that South Africa still needed to address were the Convention against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. South Africa was also a signatory to the International Covenant for Economic and Social Rights. The National Forum against Racism now needed to convene for its first meeting with all stakeholders. A programme of work would have to be decided upon and a national action plan for dealing with racism and xenophobia would be developed. The Durban Declaration had instructed the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly to put in place a process whereby additional complementary standards to the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination could be formed. The concept of xenophobia and other contemporary forms of intolerance had not been foreseen and contained in the 1965 Convention and had not been provided for in international law. The South African mission in Geneva had spearheaded this process at UN level. The debate seemed to focus on whether additional or complementary standards were needed, requiring either an additional protocol or an optional protocol. The South African standpoint was that an additional protocol was needed to deal with how states should combat the scourge of xenophobia. Mr Montwedi said that in 1997 the Commission on Human Rights in Geneva had sent a certain professor to produce a report on the level of hostility towards foreigners in this country. This report described an event where several Senegalese nationals had died after being thrown off a moving train. The report had claimed that South Africa was one of the most xenophobic countries in Africa. The government had responded to this indictment with the Brandfontein statement in 1998, in which it declared that it would amend and align legislation necessary to embrace diversity and to receive foreigners more humanely.

Discussion

Mr B Holomisa (UDM) asked whether there had been a continuation of such incidents of xenophobia since the Brandfontein report and what had been done to raise awareness of this issue and to educate the population.

Mr D Gibson (DA) asked about the training of officials in dealing with foreigners and in particular, whether the training included the police. It was his belief that presently the police were acting in ways reminiscent of apartheid days and that they were just as corrupt. He was personally aware of such incidents.

Mr L Joubert (IFP) asked how active the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities was in South Africa.

Ms M Njobe (ANC) asked which Department would be responsible for driving the promotion of awareness around issues of xenophobia.

Mr Montwedi said since the Brandfontein report had come out no further incidents had come to international attention, despite the fact that nationally such incidents had continued, for instance the mistreatment of foreigners in the farming industry. He said the government had established a South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC), the chairperson of which was required by law to table an annual report to Parliament on how the promotion and protection of human rights had been effected. This Commission was also responsible for monitoring progress in human rights education. The SAHRC was a national institution responsible for the education and promotion of human rights education. The institution did this by producing leaflets of the universal declaration of human rights and other human rights instruments and had to ensure that they were distributed throughout the country. Together with the Commission, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development was also responsible for ensuring a culture of respect for human rights and freedom. It was the task of the Department of Foreign Affairs to externalise and defend these policies on an international level.

Mr Montwedi said that the Department of Home Affairs had conducted the training on the Immigration Act. Large numbers of immigration officers as well as officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs, who were charged with the implementation of the Immigration Act, had been trained in Pretoria for periods of two weeks at a time. Mr Montwedi said he assumed that the police had also received this training. He said his Department was involved in annual meetings with the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities. The Sub-Commission had recently produced a report probing the ethical conduct of trans-national corporations and other business enterprises. Human rights law hitherto had always singled out states as violators, but now non-state actors were becoming significant. In many cases such businesses were heavily involved in violation of human rights in respect of environmental and labour standards. He said that this Sub-Commission was in effect a think tank, which was involved in researching and analysing issues around human rights. Experts served on this Sub-Commission in their personal capacity.

Mr M Ramgobin (ANC) asked to what extent exchanges took place whereby South Africa became aware of other countries' xenophobic tendencies.

Ms Njobe questioned the notion of South Africa having such a negative record as far as xenophobia was concerned as it was her personal experience to have been in other African countries where xenophobia was rife.
Mr Holomisa expressed concern over the present state of refugees in South Africa and suggested that the High Commissioner for Refugees should be working closely with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, since it seemed that many of the instances of xenophobia were related to refugees. South Africa had no refugee camps and there seemed to be insufficient control over the situation. It was also apparent that many of these refugees were involved in crime. Mr Holomisa suggested a workshop for all state departments charged with dealing with foreigners and the control of refugees. He asked whether South Africa had any extradition treaties with other African countries and what steps Foreign Affairs had taken to assist the police in these matters.

Mr Montwedi said that it was for the Department of Foreign Affairs to defend domestic policy at international level, as well as to highlight our achievements, such as the formation of statutory bodies such as the Commission for the Promotion of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities. He said that South Africa was not the worst perpetrator in so far as xenophobic tendencies were concerned and it was as a result of this recognition by the international community that South Africa had been asked to host the World Conference against Racism and Racial Discrimination. Both previous conferences had been held in Geneva. This had been a practical demonstration of gratitude for the struggle for human rights and freedom. In terms of UN perception of South Africa, we were considered as having the moral leadership to talk with authority about the issue of racism and xenophobia. Mr Montwedi said that South Africa was often expected to take active leadership and this role had been embraced.

There was a close relationship between the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Office for the High Commissioner for Refugees, as it was recognised that these issues were inextricably linked. He said that the Durban Conference had recognised various categories of victims of racism historically and based on their gravity of suffering. It had listed Africans and people of African descent and then indigenous people and refugees as major victims. The issue of refugees had been addressed at Departmental level by the Chief Directorate of Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs. The system to deal with these issues might not be strong enough yet, but he concurred that coherence was necessary in confronting the issue of refugees.

Mr Montwedi said he was not sure with how many countries South Africa had extradition treaties. This information could be ascertained. The Chief Directorate: Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs was involved in preventing international and domestic crimes such as the trafficking in persons and other trans-national crimes and in dealing with the victims of these crimes.

A Member said that the governmental initiatives did not seem to be permeating sufficiently to the public and suggested that the Departments of Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs go on a road show for this purpose. He said that there seemed to be a link between xenophobia and ethnicity. People from other countries often experienced great difficulty in obtaining the necessary documents when trying to visit this country.

Ms H Mpaka (ANC) asked whether there was co-ordination between the Human Rights Commission and the various NGO's involved with foreigners entering the country.

Mr Montwedi said that there was a South African federation of NGO's, the South African National Coalition for NGO's, and that it was directly related to the South African Human Rights Commission. This allowed them to report any concerns about violation of rights. These concerns were then brought to the attention of the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development via the Department of Home Affairs. Foreign Affairs regularly consulted with international human rights NGO's such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

Mr Montwedi concurred that there was a relation between ethnicity and xenophobia and the International Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination defined racism as prejudice based on colour, race, descent, nation and ethnic origin. He pointed out that xenophobia was the hatred of all foreigners. He said there was no international law regime covering xenophobia. This necessitated complementary or additional standards, which were currently in the process of being defined. He agreed that the people needed to be reached and that it was the responsibility of Home Affairs and the SAHRC to ensure that human rights awareness programmes would be carried forward.

Ms C Nkuna (ANC) asked whether the expiry dates of permits were being enforced.

Ms S van der Merwe, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs referred to milestones South Africa had achieved in eliminating the scourge of racism and xenophobia. There had been great progress since the Brandfontein statement. The importance placed on human rights by the UN became apparent when one looked at an organogram of its principal organs. The prominent position of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in the UN system bore testimony to how seriously these issues were taken. The human rights organs all were integrally linked to the other organs of the UN. She said that government departments and institutions would have to get involved in dealing with xenophobia and particularly the Departments of Home Affairs and Justice, since the former related directly to immigration issues and the latter was the implementing authority for the action plan that is to be developed. She said civil society had an important role to play in highlighting problems and in this respect the intended public hearings were invaluable. She looked forward to this report.

Ms Makula (Department of Home Affairs) said migration was an imminently political topic. The past few decades had seen renewed outbreaks of xenophobia throughout Africa, which blamed domestic crises on migrants. Migration was highly diversified and the causes of migration were many. In the past, mostly males had migrated, but the trend had been changing with many more women moving around the continent and more women traders coming into South Africa from the SADC countries. The President had recently signed the amended Immigration Act of 2002, which defined different categories of foreigners.

Ms Makula said South Africa had always demonstrated an exemplary solidarity towards immigrants, which could not be overshadowed by the number of outbursts of xenophobia in the country. Refugees from Mozambique had settled and integrated in South Africa. The number of asylum seekers had increased since 1990. Traders were still allowed into the country. Xenophobia could be manifested by physical violence, the undermining of integrity and violation of rights. Such incidents had occurred in South Africa and every such attack warranted intervention from both government and society. It was important to have a legislative framework incorporating the issue of xenophobia. The Department of Home Affairs had participated in a campaign on a regular basis and had embarked on their own road shows advocating tolerance towards refugees, emphasising the rights they enjoy under the Constitution. The Department had jointly celebrated various events with the UNHCR and Human Rights Commission, such as Refugee Day. The minister and deputy minister had strongly denounced xenophobia and the tendency to use the foreigner as a scapegoat for any number of ills.

The Department had restructured their national immigration branch and would incorporate a unit dedicated to combating xenophobia throughout immigration offices and in the civic affairs component. Ms Makula said that her Department was committed to applying the maximum standards of human rights when rendering services to foreigners as well as to South African citizens. Immigration officers and members of the SAPS were to be trained by the Human Rights Commission, complementing existing initiatives. It was the goal of the Department to instil in their staff the concept that foreigners are people too and that they have rights, which needed to be protected. Ms Makula said that as far as the enforcement of permit expiry dates were concerned that this was an issue currently being addressed by the Department, as systems were not fully compatible. Inspections would have to occur to ensure that these people returned to their countries.

Mr Ramgobin questioned whether we were not overemphasising our own shortfalls, without looking at xenophobia elsewhere in Southern Africa, Europe and the Middle East. Our porous borders were also a cause for concern.

Ms Nkuna pointed out that similar standards should be expected from other countries in their handling of foreigners.

Ms Njobe agreed with the sentiments expressed by Mr Ramgobin. She said it had to be taken into consideration that until 1994 South Africans had not been exposed to the influx of foreigners on the scale that was presently the case, whereas migration throughout the rest of Africa had always been great. South Africans therefore still viewed foreigners with suspicion and felt threatened by their entrepreneurship, which was setting an example for other South Africans to follow. Ms Njobe asked how the Department saw the role of parliamentarians in assisting them in the task of countering xenophobia.

Ms S van der Merwe agreed that xenophobia was a universal problem and that the Durban Conference (resolution 199) had recommended the strengthening of international standards against racism and racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerances. She said that this presentation had provided an opportunity to look at South Africa's efforts in this regard, constitutionally and legislatively. Ms van der Merwe conceded our systems needed tightening up in certain areas and that our porous borders were cause for concern, but conversely, we had to consider opening up to the rest of Southern Africa and encouraging the flow of people and goods. We needed to build on these relations with our neighbours, just as West Africa had developed an advanced system of inter-state relations. In this respect South Africa was still behind.

Ms Makula said that with the SADC exemption people had been given permanent residency in South Africa. She said the Department of Home Affairs would be engaged in various methods of raising public awareness on the issue in order to eliminate the fear of foreigners and by finding out on what these fears were based. She said that NGO's had also made a significant difference in assisting people and that a long term programme for making the police more sensitive to this issue would be started.

Ms L Jacobus (ANC) suggested that more people to people contact should be promoted and initiated.

Ms Makula said that such events were already taking place. She mentioned that annual rallies across the Lesotho bridge were being held

Mr Ramgobin questioned whether the economic cost to the country had been acknowledged in the form of resources, health services and the like. He asked whether the international community was also aware of this.

Ms Makula said that the Deputy Minister of Justice had recently been in Geneva where he had spoken about the numbers of refugees and asylum seekers in the country and also the cost of keeping these people on board. The former minister had launched the National Forum against Racism. Consultation with government, civil society and business was taking place in order to implement the Durban Declaration. The Forum had met once and had established a task team whose primary purpose would be to draw up a National Action Plan.

The business sector had set up a steering Committee, which would be co-ordinated by NAFCOC. All government departments would be drawing up their own action plans, which would be consolidated into one. Similarly, civil society and the academic sector would be producing action plans. The National Forum against Racism would establish a secretariat to co-ordinate all the different action plans and to consolidate them into one, which would then be presented to the UN. Implementation would follow. She said funding had been secured from Treasury for three years. The whole process had been lengthy and government departments' response had been slow. It was important, however, that government be seen to be taking the initiative in this matter.

Ms L Jacobus asked how many people would be employed by the secretariat.

Ms Makula said eight officials including a director and deputy director would be employed under a three-year contract.

The meeting was adjourned.