Afrikaners relocating to US could lose their refugee status should they decide to return to SA
JOHANNESBURG - Nearly 50 Afrikaners headed to the United States (US) as refugees stand to lose their status should they decide to return to South Africa.
The Department of International Relations said a group of 49 white Afrikaaners en route to America under a controversial resettlement programme could jeopardise their refugee protections if they try to come back.
ALSO READ: SA transport officials detail flight plan for aircraft carrying 49 Afrikaners relocating to US
The group is travelling under US President Donald Trump's executive order, which gives special entry to white South Africans claiming persecution, despite widespread rejection of the claim by the South African government.
Their flight is set to land at Dulles Airport outside Washington, DC. What happens after that, including where they'll live and what support they receive, is entirely up to the US government.
Their refugee applications, like all others, are handled confidentially, and South African officials said they've had no hand in the process.
But the legal implications back home are significant.
Diplomatic protections fall away, and while section 20 of the Constitution guarantees that 'no citizen may be deprived of citizenship,' returning under false claims could lead to court challenges over fraud or misrepresentation.
Department of International Relations spokesperson Chrispin Phiri said refugee status isn't a revolving door.
'You really can't have your cake and eat it. You cannot go to the US on migration and economic interest and suddenly decide, 'I miss South African weather in December, I would like to have a braai with my friends in Pretoria,' and come back. No, it does not work like that. That is something you have to forgo.'
For now, the first cohort of those fleeing what the government calls a false narrative of persecution is on its way, with more expected to follow in the coming weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
5 hours ago
- eNCA
Afrikaner 'refugee' reveals why he left South Africa
ALABAMA, US - The United Nations defines a refugee as a person who has fled their country to escape conflict, violence or persecution, and seeks safety in another country. READ: US welcomes Afrikaner 'refugees' from South Africa South Africa is divided on whether a group of Afrikaners who recently left South Africa for the US, qualify as refugees. The move has stirred controversy, with critics arguing it politicises the refugee system and ignores those fleeing war, famine, and persecution elsewhere. Despite this development, most Afrikaner communities say they have no intention of leaving South Africa, insisting their future remains rooted here. READ: DIRCO warns Afrikaners seeking refuge in US of challenges ahead In an exclusive interview, Annika Larsen headed to Alabama to speak to one man who packed up his life, and said goodbye to his homeland forever.
TimesLIVE
6 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Ramaphosa names 31 'eminent people' to champion national dialogue
President Cyril Ramaphosa will be calling a national convention on August 15, which will set the agenda for the national dialogue. Ramaphosa also announced the appointment of an eminent persons group of 31 people, who he said will guide and champion the national dialogue and act as the guarantors of an inclusive, constructive and credible process. In an announcement on Tuesday, Ramaphosa said the national convention will represent the diversity of the South African nation and will be a representative gathering, bringing together government, political parties, civil society, business, labour, traditional leaders, religious leaders, cultural workers, sports organisations, women, youth and community voices, among others. 'Through their various political, social and other formations, in their workplaces, in places of worship, communities, villages and sites of learning, South Africans will in the months following the national convention be encouraged to be in dialogue to define our nation's path into the future,' Ramaphosa said. The views, concerns and proposals that will emerge will be brought together at a second national convention, planned for the beginning of next year. Ramaphosa said there was broad agreement that given the challenges the country was facing at the moment, the national dialogue should be convened. 'The idea of holding a dialogue is not a new concept in our country. In many ways having dialogues is part of our DNA as a nation. At every important moment in the history of our country, we have come together as a nation to confront our challenges and forge a path into the future in dialogue with one another.'
Daily Maverick
6 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
After the Bell: Unemployment and definitions — it's about ending the poverty, stupid
While economists argue about the definition of 'formal unemployment', what perhaps we really need to consider is a figure around how many people do something and receive an income in return for it. For as long as I can remember, one of the 'facts' that has almost defined so many of our conversations has been that we have the world's highest unemployment rate. It's the kind of point that underpins everything else; it puts political parties under pressure to claim they're trying to create jobs, it is the easiest way to understand how our economy is not working. We get reminders of this at least four times a year when Statistics South Africa releases its Quarterly Labour Force Survey. So many parts of our political commentariat erupt when we are reminded that so many people don't have jobs. For the past five years or so, I've found it really odd that the people who are given the most time to talk are union leaders. These are literally the people who have jobs talking about the people who don't have jobs. And, famously, the ANC and the government often say nothing. In fact, I remember once asking Thulas Nxesi, who was the Minister of Labour and Employment at the time, why he was so silent on the issue. His response, that it was not his job to create jobs, but actually the role of the private sector, seemed to miss the point somewhat. So I was hugely interested to read in BusinessLIVE that the outgoing CEO of Capitec, Gerrie Fourie, reckons we're understanding this in completely the wrong way. He says that we assume that the 32.9% of South Africans of working age who are unemployed are not actually working. Instead, he thinks, they are working. They're just working in the informal sector. As he puts it: 'If you go to the townships, most people have backrooms to rent out; everyone is doing something.' 'Formal unemployment' While economists can (and do … endlessly) argue about the definition of 'formal unemployment', what perhaps we really need to consider is a figure around how many people do something and receive an income in return for it. Because, as Fourie points out: 'If we really had a 32% unemployment rate, we would have had unrest.' I have to say, I do think that's true. If there were so many people who had literally nothing to do, and did not receive money as income, we would have much more violence than we actually do. And yes, social grants do play a role. But there are many millions of people who do not get a social grant, and have no formal job. At the same time, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has said for some time that our businesses face more regulation than in any other OECD-member country. Now, while regulation per se should not really hamper businesses, I think in South Africa it probably does. Some of the regulations seem unnecessarily onerous, but, more importantly, they open opportunities for corruption. And there is also an almost fatal lack of understanding from the government about the role so many informal businesses play. For example, during the pandemic, informal food markets were closed, along with spaza shops. That had the impact of making food more expensive just at the entirely wrong time. But we also don't really know how big the informal sector is. At least until 2019, our informal food sector – including spaza shops, hawkers, street traders and bakkie traders – employed more people than the formal food sector. That means that for every single person you see working in a supermarket, there is at least one other person in the informal sector. And that's just in food! Sustainable living You can imagine how many other people make a sustainable living from cutting hair or in the beauty industry, or simply washing cars. The people you see outside so many hardware stores hoping and praying they will get some work are making some money too. The problem, if there is one, seems to be that we want to focus on the formal sector. The sector that is regulated, and appears to have too many regulations. Instead, perhaps we should be focusing on simply creating the space for people to do something and be paid money in return. In other words, we should be trying to make people richer to reduce poverty. Of course, I could argue against myself here. Other research has shown that our economy is overly concentrated, basically many sectors are dominated by just a few companies. And getting new companies into those sectors is quite tough. We may not grow our economy without some kind of targeted intervention that results in de-concentration either. Changing a definition doesn't change anything, obviously. But, it does allow us to focus properly on what the real problems are. The real problem is poverty; we need more people to get more money for what they do.
