By Rosina Shiko
The Department of Home Affairs’ new Digital Asylum System has drawn criticism from ActionSA and March and March, with both organisations arguing that the online process will not address illegal immigration, corruption and weaknesses in border management.
The department launched the first phase of the system on Tuesday, allowing people already in South Africa to register their intention to apply for asylum online.
Home Affairs Minister Dr Leon Schreiber said the system would reduce processing delays, clear the asylum appeals backlog, combat corruption and abuse, and facilitate the deportation of rejected asylum seekers.
The department said the system gives effect to the Constitutional Court judgment of 7 July 2026 in a sustainable manner while strengthening national security and protecting the department’s capacity.
Later phases will incorporate machine learning and artificial intelligence to reduce processing times.
The portal is currently being tested with an initial batch of cases and will open for public applications following the department’s next routine software release this weekend.
Schreiber attributed the asylum system’s challenges to prolonged processing delays, which he said had been exploited by opportunistic applicants, as well as chronic shortages of funding and personnel.
He revealed that, at the beginning of the current administration, Home Affairs had only nine officials handling thousands of outstanding appeals.
The minister said the new system would protect people with genuine asylum claims while ensuring the swift deportation of unsuccessful applicants.
However, the department stressed that registering an intention to apply for asylum does not confer any immigration status, constitute a formal asylum application or automatically grant asylum, refugee status or citizenship.
It also warned that registration does not provide blanket protection against immigration enforcement and that deportations would continue in accordance with the law.
ActionSA parliamentary chief whip Lerato Ngobeni and March and March national spokesperson Sandile Dube have rejected the initiative, arguing that digitising the process does not address the underlying problems.
‘NORMALISING THE ABNORMAL’
Ngobeni said ActionSA had taken note of the announcement but rejected the digital platform, describing it as an inadequate response to the challenges surrounding asylum applications.
“We don’t believe that the digital platform is going to solve the problems that we are currently facing,” she said.
Her central objection is that people who have entered the country illegally can now register their intention to seek asylum.
“You are actually trying to normalise the abnormal. You are also trying to legalise the illegal,” she said.
“We already know that over 90% of the people who are seeking asylum in this country are not genuine asylum seekers.”
Dube adopted a similarly critical position, arguing that the system would legitimise the presence of people who had entered and remained in South Africa unlawfully.
“That person is a criminal. Has been in the country for quite a long time. And without subjecting themselves to the laws of the country,” he said.
“So they remain criminals. So basically the system is saying criminals must apply online. So that this online application is to legitimise the criminals.”
Ngobeni also warned that the digital process would make asylum seekers less visible to the public.
She said the large numbers of people who had previously gathered at Home Affairs offices following the directive had made the scale of the issue visible to South Africans. The online system, she argued, would simply move the process out of public view.
“The people of South Africa must never be fooled or blinded into silence just because they will not be seeing,” she said.
Dube said March and March remained opposed to both the Constitutional Court judgment and the digital system, arguing that the court had failed to listen to the concerns of ordinary South Africans.
“We think the ConCourt did not listen to the views of the people of South Africa,” he said.
THE 95% DEPORTATION PROMISE
Both organisations also questioned Home Affairs’ assurance that rejected asylum seekers would be deported, with the minister citing a 95% rejection rate.
Ngobeni said the country’s deportation system had not demonstrated that it was effective or served as a deterrent.
She argued that even when applications were processed more quickly, rejected applicants could still appeal against the decisions while remaining in South Africa.
“We have not solved the problem. We have simply put cream on a wound,” she said.
She also questioned whether specialised courts would be established to deal with asylum appeals, given the existing pressure on the country’s judicial system.
Dube dismissed the department’s assurances, saying they amounted to little more than promises.
“We don’t take it. It’s just a talk show,” he said.
He argued that the 95% rejection figure did not capture the full extent of alleged corruption in the immigration system.
According to Dube, the figure largely reflected applicants who followed the formal process, while those with financial resources could allegedly obtain documents through corrupt networks involving Home Affairs officials.
“So one can be able to read at the 95% rejection rate. Those are perhaps your honest applicants. There are those with money,” he said.
He referred to a Special Investigating Unit report which he said exposed corruption within the department.
“We know that they will see through the system,” he said.
Ngobeni said Members of Parliament should demand access to the system’s database and hold the department accountable for its performance.
She said MPs should seek information on the number of applications received, how many had been rejected, how many applicants had appealed, where cases stood in the processing system and how long decisions took.
CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, THE PEOPLE AND BORDER CONTROL
On the Constitutional Court’s 7 July judgment, Ngobeni said ActionSA had not yet had an opportunity to study it fully because MPs had recently been involved in the local government election process and the portfolio committee had not been able to meet.
Dube argued that the judgment violated the human rights of South Africans by failing to consider their concerns.
“Yes. That violates our human rights,” he said.
He pointed to 120 marches held across the country on 30 June, involving people from different racial and tribal backgrounds, as evidence of public dissatisfaction.
“When we say the people shall govern, what do we mean? Because this constitutional democracy was built on the foundation that the people shall govern,” he said.
“If the people are governing via marches showing their dissatisfaction, surely these three arms of the state must listen.”
Dube said the outcome of the 2026 local government elections also demonstrated the consequences of ignoring public sentiment.
“So the people of South Africa were violated. So you saw how the ANC was punished. It really tells you that when people say they don’t want something you must listen,” he said.
He conceded that the Constitutional Court might have been legally correct but argued that this did not address the concerns raised by communities.
“But your correctness if it violates the people then it’s meaningless,” he said.
“You cannot interpret the law while the majority of people are saying they are suffering from human trafficking and drug trafficking. Their children are being violated.”
Ngobeni echoed the argument, saying elected representatives should prioritise the interests of citizens.
“That’s who we govern for. We don’t govern for the Constitutional Court. We govern for the people of South Africa,” she said.
She also questioned the effectiveness of border management, claiming that the Border Management Authority was operating at only 25% of its capacity.
Ngobeni argued that the digital system would allow people to enter the country through irregular channels and subsequently register an intention to seek asylum while their cases were being processed.
“It simply means you have an influx of people who can come in however way that they come into the country and then simply register an intention and that intention makes it well and good for them to be here while we wait for that intention to be processed,” she said.
Dube linked what he described as inadequate border control to crime, citing cases involving alleged criminal activity by foreign nationals, including the hijacking of vehicles along the N4 corridor by Mozambican nationals and the murders of Likhona Fose and DJ Warras.
“These are some of the famous people but what about ordinary people on the ground who suffer on a daily basis for these crimes?” he asked.
He said March and March respected the rule of law but argued that it should also reflect the experiences and concerns of ordinary citizens.
WHAT THEY WANT INSTEAD
Both organisations called for changes to immigration legislation rather than relying on digital systems to address the challenges.
Ngobeni said ActionSA believed the Constitution needed to be amended, describing it as a living document that could be changed with a two-thirds majority in Parliament.
“We believe that the Constitution of the land really needs to say something different,” she said.
Asked whether constitutional amendments would form part of ActionSA’s plans if it came to power in 2029, she said: “Absolutely.”
She also confirmed that the party intended to pursue legal action to challenge the decision.
“Absolutely,” she said.
In its submissions to the White Paper on Immigration, ActionSA proposed establishing asylum and repatriation centres at the country’s borders.
“While this process is happening, have the centres at the border right at the gate and then you only let through the ones that qualify. The ones who don’t qualify deport them,” Ngobeni said.
“We don’t know where they are and you can’t find them.”
She also proposed introducing an asylum quota based on the country’s ability to accommodate applicants, whether 200,000 or one million, as well as strictly applying the first-entry principle.
Ngobeni questioned how many countries an applicant from Ethiopia, for example, had travelled through before reaching South Africa.
She said authorities should also verify claims of persecution arising from war or political circumstances.
“Are they able to prove that?” she asked.
Ngobeni further argued that South Africa should reconsider its approach to accommodating asylum seekers and proposed that other African countries contribute towards the costs of supporting their citizens living in South Africa.
She claimed that money earned in South Africa was being sent back to other countries.
BY-LAWS AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Both organisations also identified municipal by-laws as an immediate tool for addressing immigration-related concerns while broader legislative changes were pursued.
Ngobeni pointed to Tshwane, where ActionSA and its former coalition partners had passed by-laws aimed at tightening regulations governing foreign nationals operating businesses.
“Give them no incentive for them to be in this country and proceed as they have been proceeding,” she said.
“For us as ActionSA we would say we would make it absolutely uncomfortable for anyone who is in the country unlawfully to be in the country.”
Dube also cited Tshwane under Mayor Dr Nasiphi Moya as an example of how municipal by-law enforcement could be used.
He referred to conditions in Sunnyside, where he alleged that fish was being sold on the streets without proper temperature controls and called for stricter enforcement of health permit requirements.
He also raised concerns about food safety at tuck shops, alleging that children had been affected by contaminated food and that some businesses operated in unhygienic conditions.
“We’ve seen a lot of children affected in tuck shops,” he said.
He described premises where tap water was allegedly purified behind a sleeping bed in a space used simultaneously as a kitchen, bedroom and shop.
“So all those type of tuck shops from these foreign nationals need to be evicted via the by-laws,” Dube said.
He argued that newly elected councillors and mayors should introduce stricter municipal regulations where existing by-laws were inadequate.
“So there’s so much that local government can do to ensure that despite the challenges we face with our legislation, the by-laws can assist us in mitigating the factors,” he said.
Ngobeni said public frustration over immigration had grown, but the government had failed to respond adequately.
“The people of this country are saying we are squeezed, we are tired. We cannot function with it,” she said.
