When xenophobia rears its ugly head it is time to ask the right questions
It's no accident. It's a strategy, and one we've seen play out time and again. When political failures pile up and service delivery grinds to a halt, scapegoating foreign nationals becomes a convenient distraction. Instead of holding local government accountable for broken promises, potholes, power cuts and clinics without doctors, we're told the problem is 'illegal foreigners'.
It's a dangerous misdirection and it's costing lives. Instead of directing our rightful anger towards dysfunctional municipalities and inept leadership, we're encouraged sometimes by officials themselves to lash out at those even more vulnerable than us. It's easier to point fingers at desperate migrants in clinic queues than to question how our cities became places of neglect.
Nowhere is this more evident than in the deeply troubling scenes unfolding outside public healthcare facilities across South Africa. Foreign nationals or those merely suspected of being foreign are being chased away, blocked from entering clinics and denied their constitutional rights. These acts aren't just inhumane; they are illegal.
Let's be clear, section 27 of the South African Constitution guarantees everyone – yes, everyone – the right to access healthcare services. This includes migrants, asylum seekers and undocumented persons. It is not a matter of opinion. It is the law.
And here's the part too many people overlook: having all people healthy within our borders is a public good. Allowing anyone, regardless of nationality, to suffer from untreated TB, measles or HIV does not just threaten their health, it endangers ours. Public health doesn't discriminate, and neither should we.
What makes this even more dangerous is the recent targeting of human rights organisations like the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (Seri), Helen Suzman Foundation and the South African Human Rights Commission by xenophobic movements like Operation Dudula. These organisations grounded in constitutionalism and justice have dared to remind us that we are a country governed by laws, not mob sentiment.
In the face of these attacks, Abahlali baseMjondolo showed us what real solidarity looks like. Their decision to form a human chain outside Seri's offices, physically defending the space and its staff, was an act of profound courage. It reminded us that human rights are not abstract principles, they must be defended in action, in public and with conviction.
This is not just about foreign nationals. This is about the soul of our democracy. If we allow attacks on human rights defenders and on organisations like Seri to go unanswered, we set the stage for broader repression. Today it's them. Tomorrow it's all of us.
We must stand up, speak out and defend what is right. Human rights are not a suggestion. They are the foundation of our Constitution. They are the promise of 1994. And they are under threat.
Operation Dudula together with March and March are attacking our democratic values, our hard-won freedoms and the rule of law. If groups like Seri, Helen Suzman Foundation and the South African Human Rights Commission are silenced, who will speak up when your rights are next in line?
We must not allow anger to be weaponised against the wrong people. It is time to ask better questions. Why are our clinics underresourced in the first place? Why are there not enough trained healthcare workers? Why is the housing backlog growing year after year? And why are we not holding local councillors and officials to account for this?
Foreign nationals didn't fail to maintain your community's water infrastructure. They didn't loot public funds meant for housing and healthcare. They didn't shut down your clinic or redirect its budget. That was your government.
South Africa is at a crossroads and we can continue being played, turning on each other in frustration. We must start organising, demanding better services, transparent leadership and a government that serves everyone who lives here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
6 hours ago
- The Citizen
Struggle veterans in Endumeni call on municipalities to respect constitutional rights
ANC struggle veterans and members of the ANC Women's League gathered in Dundee last week to honour the legacy of Nelson Mandela and reflect on the sacrifices made during South Africa's liberation struggle. The joint engagement also served as a platform for raising urgent concerns around governance, service delivery and constitutional rights. Addressing the gathering, local struggle veteran Mzwakhe Sithebe said: 'The exorbitant billing by Umzinyathi, along with misleading estimates, continues to frustrate residents. There is a serious lack of public participation within both Umzinyathi and Endumeni municipalities. This is unacceptable.' Sithebe expressed full support for the community's pending legal action against the municipality for its failure to provide water. 'An increasing number of areas in Endumeni are experiencing dry taps. This is a clear violation of Sections 24 and 27 of the Constitution. The constitutional mandate is not being honoured.' He added that the 'renewed ANC is not inward-looking but responsive to people's needs', stressing that members are committed to building a party that remains a servant of the people. Other key concerns raised during the meeting included: The slow progress on land restitution, which members said must be prioritised to build a responsive state; Allegations of nepotism in municipal appointments, with preference reportedly given to relatives of officials; Councillors failing to hold regular constituency meetings; The absence of genuine public participation in local government despite it being a cornerstone of democracy outlined in the Freedom Charter and Section 152 of the Constitution. Sithebe concluded: 'The call that 'the people shall govern' must be more than just words. Our municipalities must reflect the will and needs of our communities.' HAVE YOUR SAY: Like our Facebook page, follow us on Twitter and Instagram or email us at [email protected]. Add us on WhatsApp 071 277 1394.
TimesLIVE
10 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Does SA need a Covid-like ministerial advisory committee to deal with HIV funding cuts?
Increase health taxes. Roll out the twice-a-year anti-HIV jab lenacapavir to stop HIV from spreading. Use artificial intelligence (AI) to do more with less. Convene a ministerial advisory committee. These are some of the things that have surfaced as potential solutions to fill the huge gap that US President Donald Trump's administration's sudden funding cuts in February have left. But would they work — and are they doable? Only if we move fast, and get lots of each thing, it seems. Health minister Aaron Motsoaledi told Bhekisisa's TV show, Health Beat, in July, that he 'would strongly consider' a ministerial advisory committee (MAC), like the one we had during the Covid pandemic for which scientists advised the health department on what to do. 'There's nothing wrong with establishing a MAC [to deal with funding cuts],' Motsoaledi admitted ... but we've not yet established anything like that for [the funding crisis].' No MAC or emergency think-tank with input beyond government structures has since been announced by the health department. But scientists warn such a committee should be an important part of the country's response to the crisis. 'We need to urgently convene a national think-tank,' medical doctor and the head of Wits RHI, Helen Rees, cautions. 'There are some really superb people who've been working in the programmes closely and well with the health department who could contribute their ideas and experience ... [and help figure out] what [strategies] can we [the health department] retain that aren't hugely expensive.' In Johannesburg, research released at the Conference on HIV Science in Kigali in July, shows HIV testing between January and March 2025 was 8.5% lower than the same time last year (before the funding cuts), and 31% less people were diagnosed with HIV in 2025. During the same period, there was also a 30% reduction in people who tested positive, who started on antiretroviral treatment, compared to 2024. So what has South Africa done so far? Motsoaledi has managed to raise a small amount of extra funding — R735m — from the treasury through the Public Finance Management Act. But it's less than 10% of the R7.9bn we've lost (and are in all likelihood about to lose in September, the end of the US financial year). The country is, however, starting to make progress with the rollout of lenacapavir, an injection that is taken once every six months, that provides near complete protection against HIV infection. About 170,000 people got newly infected with HIV in 2024, according to the latest Joint UN Programme on HIV and Aids report. A modelling study has shown if between two- and four-million people in the country take the jab, each year, for the next eight years, South Africa could end Aids as a public health threat by 2032. South Africa's medicines regulator, the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority, has told Bhekisisa the shot will be registered in the country before the end of the year. And, at a presentation at the Kigali conference, health department consultant Hasina Subedar said, if all goes well, the department will start to roll out the jab in April 2026. In July, the health department accepted an offer from the Global Fund for Aids, TB and Malaria, to reallocate R520m of its funds to buy lenacapavir from its maker, Gilead Sciences, over the next three years until cheaper generic versions become available. The funds will become available in October. But, if the health department budgets for the $60 per patient per year that the Global Fund has told them to, the grant is only enough to put about 400,000 people on preventive treatment for three years — about 10% of what is needed to end Aids by 2032. One more way to generate 'a stable and predictable funding stream' without donors, according to a July report by the public health organisation Vital Strategies, is to increase taxes on tobacco, alcohol and sugary drinks to a level where taxes constitute 50% of the selling price of the products. That money can then be used, among other things, to improve health infrastructure. According to the report, 45.7% of the price of a box of cigarettes, 27.6% of a bottle of beer and 3.4% of sugar-sweetened carbonated drinks currently go towards taxes in South Africa. Mia Malan recently asked Wits RHI's Helen Rees how the country should go about to find solutions to the HIV and TB funding crisis. Following is an edited version of the full TV interview.
The Citizen
17 hours ago
- The Citizen
Ramaphosa seeks apartheid damages case delay, but victims' families argue perpetrators are dying
The court was told that the government's interest lies in uncovering the truth. President Cyril Ramaphosa has asked the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria to stay a damages case brought by families of victims of apartheid-era crimes. However, lawyers for the applicants have warned that the alleged perpetrators are old and dying. The legal action, initiated by 25 families and survivors of apartheid victims – including relatives of the Cradock Four – seeks R167 million in constitutional damages. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa launches commission of inquiry into apartheid-era justice delays The applicants accuse the government of blocking the investigation and prosecution of murder cases referred by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). Ramaphosa has since established a commission of inquiry chaired by retired judge Sisi Khampepe to investigate the lack of prosecutions. Ramaphosa urges court to delay apartheid damages case On Wednesday, Advocate Timothy Bruinders, representing Ramaphosa and government, argued in court that the commission should be allowed to complete its work before the damages case proceeds. 'There was notice put out by judge Khampepe in which she set out what the progress will be over the next month. 'I think she has just started work on it so it's settled that there is a commission,' he told the court. Bruinders pointed out that both the TRC and the families had previously called for the establishment of such a commission to investigate the apartheid-era crimes. 'The reason for the commission of inquiry is because the facts are as yet unknown,' he said. ALSO READ: Mbeki accused of trying to save his reputation by intervening in apartheid lawsuit Judge Nicolene Janse van Nieuwenhuizen, however, raised a concern about whether it was not the applicants' prerogative to go ahead or withdraw their case. Bruinders responded that the case relied on the commission's findings in order for the court to make a ruling on damages. He argued that former National Director of Public Prosecutions Vusi Pikoli did not provide enough detail to conclude that interference occurred in one of the TRC cases. 'One could conclude from that there was an attempted interference.' Watch the case below: Bruinders added that the government and president sympathise with the families. 'They don't have closure. As they say, the prosecutions haven't happened. 'This is of concern to any government who cares about its citizens and those who died in fighting for what he ultimately sees now in the Constitution.' He emphasised that the government's interest lies in uncovering the truth. 'It is not to fight the families on procedural matters. One can imagine how that would go down politically. I do not think it would go down very well.' Victims' families demand justice Later, Advocate Matthew Chaskalson – representing the families – criticised the government's request to the court to delay the damages case, particularly as it had years to establish the commission. 'The applicants are seeking justice for crimes that were committed 30 and 35 years ago. That's the period we are dealing with. 'The perpetrators of these crimes have either already died or are dying at a rapid rate,' he said, pointing out that most suspects are now likely in their 70s. Chaskalson told the court that the applicants themselves are aging and that some have already died. 'They do not have time to wait indefinitely for the commission of inquiry to report and for relief to be recommended,' the lawyer said, adding that the applicants are entitled to their day in court while they are still alive. He further argued that commissions of inquiry have a tendency to 'drag on and on'. 'It is an extraordinarily optimistic proposition to put forward the idea that this commission will be able to do a thorough job on its investigation and report in four months' time, which is all it has left of the originally six months.' The court has reserved the judgment. NOW READ: Khampepe Commission is the right platform for Mbeki, Mabandla to tell their story, court rules
