Refugees Act case: Helen Suzman Foundation applies to be a friend of the WC High Court
Last year, the court granted the Scalabrini Centre in Cape Town an interdict barring the Home Affairs Department from deporting foreign nationals if they indicated their intention to apply for asylum under the Refugees Act.
Picture: Pixabay
JOHANNESBURG - The Helen Suzman Foundation has applied with the Western Cape High Court to join as a friend of the court in a legal challenge to have parts of the Refugees Act declared unlawful.
Last year, the court granted the Scalabrini Centre in Cape Town an interdict barring the Home Affairs Department from deporting foreign nationals if they indicated their intention to apply for asylum under the Refugees Act.
One of the sections of the Refugees Act in dispute stipulates that an asylum seeker does not qualify for refugee status if an officer has reason to believe that they’ve entered the country by means other than through a designated port of entry.
Another is if they fail to satisfy the officer with compelling reasons for their entry.
A third section looks at whether they’ve reported to a refugee reception office within five days of entering the country, and if they’ve provided compelling reasons, which may include hospitalisation or institutionalisation, if they have not.
The Scalabrini Centre and the Helen Suzman Foundation argue that deporting foreign nationals without considering the merits of their asylum application goes against the international law principle of non-refoulement.
This law prohibits countries from deporting people who may face serious or irreparable harm.
The organisations argue that the sections are inconsistent with the constitution and want them declared unlawful and invalid.