Border reform Bill welcomed, but rights concerns dominate public submissions
Public feedback on South Africa's One-Stop Border Post Bill, which Home Affairs Minister
A summary of the eight submissions, described as 'fairly substantive', was presented to parliament's home affairs portfolio committee on Tuesday.
They range from the United Nations' human rights office and labour federation Cosatu to legal advocacy groups and the Consumer Goods Council of South Africa.
The Bill aims to consolidate border procedures between South Africa and its neighbours at land ports of entry and is seen as a tool to improve efficiency and unlock regional economic integration.
The modernisation that the proposed legislation seeks is viewed as key to aligning with the strategies of the
But some fear the legislation, in its current form, could do so at the expense of the Constitution's most vulnerable subjects: asylum seekers, unaccompanied children and stateless individuals. Central to the concern is clause 7, which sets rules for readmitting individuals denied entry.
The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), migrants and refugee welfare organisation Scalabrini Centre, the South African Bishops' Conference and Lawyers for Human Rights have expressed 'significant concern' that the clause violates international and domestic refugee protections by potentially enabling refoulement — the forced return of asylum seekers to dangerous conditions — based solely on the legality of their entry.
The groups recommend that the clause is amended to clearly state that no one can be sent back to a country where they may be harmed, and ensure that people asking for asylum and stateless persons are protected, no matter how they entered South Africa.
The clause should also mention important parts of the Refugees Act and international laws that support these rights.
The Bill's preamble also drew criticism for omitting any mention of human rights or corruption — two issues deeply embedded in border governance.
The Scalabrini Centre, Bishops' Conference and the OHCHR called for references to constitutional rights and protections for vulnerable persons.
Clause 6 — permitting the free transfer of money and goods within a common control zone — was 'strongly objected' to by the Consumer Goods Council of South Africa, which submitted that it would allow South African and foreign officials to move money and goods across borders for vague 'official use' without being subject to customs, import/export or exchange control regulations.
Such unchecked authority poses a risk of facilitating money laundering, illicit trade and corruption, especially as South Africa remains on the Financial Action Task Force's
The Consumer Goods Council recommended that the clause be removed in its entirety.
Cosatu raised alarm over what it sees as a procedural misstep: the department of home affairs failed to table the Bill at Nedlac, the body responsible for tripartite consultations between government, business and labour.
This, it said, undermines both the legislative process and workers' interests, particularly regarding staffing, training, and resource allocation under the One-Stop Border Post regime.
Several submissions also spotlighted ambiguity regarding the roles of various enforcement agencies — from the Border Management Authority to the South African Revenue Service and the South African Police service — under a model of shared jurisdiction with neighbouring states.
Fears included overlapping authority, confusion over legal application in joint control zones and lack of clear conflict resolution mechanisms.
Although supporters — including think tanks and border governance experts — welcomed the Bill's intention to modernise and rationalise border posts, there was a clear call for a revised draft. Among the proposals: stronger human rights language, alignment with international law, independent oversight mechanisms, and public awareness campaigns.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
4 hours ago
- IOL News
Legacy foundations pull out of National Dialogue amid funding uncertainty
Seven leading foundations have withdrawn from the National Dialogue Convention, citing concerns over rushed planning, loss of citizen leadership, and lack of transparency in the process. Image: File Former President Thabo Mbeki has clarified the reasons for his foundation's withdrawal from the National Dialogue, a government initiative designed to unite South Africans in addressing the nation's most pressing issues. Mbeki stated that a key factor in the decision was the uncertainty regarding the R700 million allocated for the National Dialogue. Mbeki's foundation, along with other prominent legacy foundations, including the Steve Biko Foundation, Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation, and FW de Klerk Foundation, withdrew from the National Dialogue Convention scheduled to kick off on Friday. The foundations cited concerns over the rushed timeline, inadequate preparation, and shift towards government control as reasons for their withdrawal. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading "We feel the organisation of the matter was not entirely honest as to where the funds will be directed," Mbeki said. "This is due to our belief that core principles meant to underpin the whole National Dialogue have been violated in the rush to host a gathering on August 15." The foundations also cited the absence of a confirmed, approved budget allocation and last-minute commitment of initial funds have made sound preparation impossible and deep disagreements exist within the Preparatory Task Team over the nature of the dialogue, readiness, governance, and risk. The foundations have proposed rescheduling the convention to after October 15 to allow for adequate preparation, coherence, and participatory integrity. The National Dialogue is an inclusive, citizen-driven process focused on developing a vision and plan for South Africa for the next 30 years. The Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) expressed strong disapproval regarding the proposed R700 million budget for the National Dialogue. 'Like many other rational South Africans, Cosatu was astonished that such a figure could even be suggested. This arbitrary budget number should be considered a verbal slip and a reckless error, best forgotten." Despite the withdrawal of the legacy foundations, President Cyril Ramaphosa has confirmed that the first national convention will proceed as scheduled. The Presidency further distanced itself from the estimated R700 million price tag for the dialogue. 'The Presidency wishes to confirm that all budgetary processes regarding the National Convention are consistent with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA). 'The Inter-Ministerial Committee, which is chaired by Deputy President Paul Mashatile and comprises all relevant government departments to coordinate government's contribution towards the National Dialogue, has been working to mobilise resources for the convention and manage costs,' the presidency said in a statement yesterday.
The Herald
6 hours ago
- The Herald
Chief justice introduces sexual harassment policy for judiciary
Chief justice Mandisa Maya has announced the introduction of a sexual harassment policy for the judiciary. Maya said the policy is necessary and an urgent intervention. 'The judiciary cannot dispense justice to society if it does not first ensure it within its own ranks. Sexual harassment is a gross abuse of power, a denial of equality and a stain on the legitimacy of the courts. We are going to tackle it head on and this policy will be a very useful mechanism in that battle,' she said. In recent months, the sordid saga of Eastern Cape judge president Selby Mbenenge raised hard questions about sexual harassment in the judiciary. Mbenenge is facing sexual harassment charges brought against him at the judicial conduct tribunal by a judge's secretary from his division. Maya said the policy will entrench a culture of accountability and respect, ensuring the judiciary remains a beacon of justice for all. According to the chief justice, the policy reiterates the judiciary's unwavering commitment to the constitutional values of human dignity, equality and justice and sends a clear message that 'sexual harassment has no place in the halls of justice'. 'As custodians of the constitution, judges and magistrates bear a profound responsibility to uphold the highest standards of integrity. The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct and South Africa's own Judicial Codes of Conduct demand nothing less. Yet, where sexual harassment occurs within the judiciary, it is not only a personal violation; it is also an affront to the rule of law itself, eroding public trust and betraying the very principles the institution exists to defend and uphold,' she said. The key principles of the policy include zero tolerance for sexual harassment by or against any judicial officer, staff member or individual engaging with the judiciary. It also includes clear, confidential and fair procedures for reporting and addressing complaints, with protections against retaliation, accountability, disciplinary consequences for offenders and a safe and respectful workplace free from discrimination and intimidation. Maya has directed members of the judiciary to urgently familiarise themselves with the policy and ensure adherence. 'This is not merely a document; it is a covenant with the people of South Africa. We must lead by example.' TimesLIVE
Mail & Guardian
11 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
The new trade playbook: Africa's response to US bilateralism
US President Donald Trump announced a 30% tariff on South African goods, saying his country's relationship with Pretoria has been, 'unfortunately, far from reciprocal'. (X) On 2 April, the world witnessed a trademark move from US President Donald Trump, who declared the day Using an unprecedented and unconventional methodology, the US calculated these tariffs by taking its trade deficit with each country, dividing it by the value of that country's exports to the US, and then halving the result. The outcome was a sweeping set of tariffs ranging from 10% to 50%, with countries such as Lesotho at the upper end of the scale. This one-size-fits-all approach blatantly disregards unique country-specific realities, especially for least developed countries. Take Lesotho: years of support from successive US governments under the African Growth Opportunity Act helped it develop an export-oriented apparel industry employing about More broadly, the reciprocal tariff regime is not only punitive, it undermines US commitments under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules. It poses a direct challenge to the multilateral trade system, and Africa is directly in the crosshairs. The tariffs will be felt across African countries. Although the US announced a pause in implementing full reciprocal tariffs until August, providing a window for One noteworthy example of this is the UK-US 'Economic Prosperity Deal'. The two parties seem to have agreed on a Other countries — including Vietnam, Philippines and Japan — have signed bilateral deals involving adjusted tariff rates (20%, 19% and 15% respectively). These are accompanied by supplementary conditions such as penalties on transhipped goods or sector-specific investment clauses. Notably, there is no trade deal, yet, with any African country. Zimbabwe was the first African country to respond in April 2025, prematurely, by suspending all tariffs on US imports in a bid to signal goodwill. Meanwhile, major African economies such as South Africa and Kenya are deep in negotiations, attempting to secure favourable terms in the face of mounting pressure. While another extension to the tariff pause seems likely, it's clear that the US is pursuing a transactional, bilateral trade strategy, offering selective relief in exchange for sectoral concessions or access to strategic resources like critical minerals. This approach is deeply concerning. It reduces complex trade relationships to blunt negotiations, with developing countries expected to simply 'take it or leave it'. Such a strategy fragments global trade into a patchwork of uneven bargains, privileging those with greater economic or strategic clout. For African countries, the risk is clear: without a united response, they risk being sidelined. The danger is that African nations may be pressured into accepting inequitable deals without the protection of multilateral institutions like the WTO. These deals could extend to critical sectors such as raw materials, where African leverage is significant but often underused. In response, African countries must pursue smart sector-specific bilateral deals and push for tariff exemptions on key exports like apparel, coffee and minerals. Leveraging the continents' strategic assets (minerals such as cobalt, lithium, for example) is critical to securing favourable terms. At the same time, it is crucial to diversify trade partnerships with emerging economies like China, and enhancing South-South cooperation for new export markets will be key. Long-term resilience will also require African governments to invest in industrial competitiveness and deepen regional integration under the African Continental Free Trade Area. In this new trade playbook, Africa must not be a passive player. With coordinated strategy and assertive diplomacy, the continent can protect its interests and shape a more equitable global trading order. Shimukunku Manchishi is a senior policy officer: trade at African Future Policies Hub.
