Abstract
On 19 June 2019, one day before World Refugee Day, the Western Cape High Court handed down judgment in a case brought by the University of Cape Town’s Refugee Rights Unit on behalf of the Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town, which sought to improve the lives of thousands of asylum-seeking families across South Africa. The order, which was made after successful negotiations with the Department of Home Affairs (DHA/The Department) means that wives, husbands, children and other dependents of asylum-seekers and refugees are now able to document themselves in South Africa as ‘dependents’ of the principle asylum applicant in a process commonly known as ‘family-joining’. This aspect of the Refugee Act – outlined at section 3(c) – means that refugee families can be documented together, ensuring their rights to family unity and dignity in South Africa.
 The order confirms a set of Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) that had been agreed on by the applicants and DHA. The SOPs allow for refugees to apply to be documented (either through family joining or on their own grounds) upon provision of certain documents, where possible, such as a marriage certificate or birth certificate or affidavit (in the absence of such documents) – regardless of where the marriage or birth took place. Family joining can now also be completed regardless of whether the dependents in question were included in the applicant’s original asylum application or not. The SOPs also provide for DNA testing as a measure of last resort to confirm the validity of parents’ claim over their child. These changes mean that asylum-seeking and refugee families can now fulfil their right to access documentation in South Africa. Kelley Moult spoke to Sally Gandar, the Head of Advocacy and Legal Advisor for the Scalabrini Centre, and Popo Mfubu, an attorney at the Refugee Rights Unit, about the ground-breaking case.
Highlights
Kelley Moult (KM): How does a case like this come about and how do your organisations decide to use the courts to try to shift implementation in this way?
Popo Mfubu (PM): When we launched the case, we were initially concerned that the problem of not allowing dependents to be joined onto a main applicant’s asylum-seeker refugee status document, which is often referred to as family joining, may be a problem that is just isolated to the Cape Town refugee reception office
We wrote to colleagues across the country, like the Nelson Mandela University Refugee Rights Clinic in Port Elizabeth, and to colleagues in Durban at Lawyers for Human Rights, and to colleagues in Johannesburg at the Legal Resources Centre, and they all confirmed that the same barrier exists – that people who were dependents or spouses of asylum seekers or refugees were not being documented
Summary
Kelley Moult (KM): How does a case like this come about and how do your organisations decide to use the courts to try to shift implementation in this way?. What that means is that he should take them to Home Affairs, and they should be issued with an asylum seeker permit or a refugee status document (depending on which document the main applicant has).
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
