 |
|
| Related Articles |
| More Politics stories |
| Online Services |
|
 |
||
| Date Your Destiny | ||
|
||
| More Services |
|
| More Politics Stories |
| What fuels the hatred? |
| May 19 2008 at 01:26PM |
Get IOL on your mobile at m.iol.co.za |
|
On the annual celebration of Africa Day in 2001, President Thabo Mbeki urged all South Africans to be vigilant against racism and xenophobia, otherwise it would undermine South Africa's young democracy.
Clearly South Africa has failed to effectively address the rising tide of xenophobia. This paper seeks to examine government responses to the problem of xenophobia, to learn from the international experience and to propose concrete measures the government can embark on to deal with a growing hatred towards foreigners. How has the government responded to the problem of xenophobia? Although the government has, in recent years, begun to recognise the magnitude of the problem of xenophobia and the need to tackle it in order to prevent it from undermining their young democracy, politicians have frequently expressed xenophobic views and have been allowed to present them as the views of not only their department, but even of the government itself.
Contemporary statements from ANC spokespersons have intimated that human rights are largely inapplicable to foreigners in general, and migrants in particular; for example, ANC MP Desmond Lockey said: "There are very few countries in the world which would extend human rights to non-citizens." However, xenophobic sentiments are not confined to the ruling party and criticisms against immigrants have spanned the political spectrum. In the run-up to the 1999 elections, for example, a range of political parties used anti-immigration discourse to attract votes. In an unlikely show of alliance politics, the Pan African Congress (PAC) and Freedom Alliance (FA), as well as the New National Party (NNP) and the United Democratic Movement (UDM), raised the spectre of the negative impact that foreigners are assumed to have on South Africa's economy and society. The election manifestos of the UDM and the FA explicitly advocated stricter immigration controls. Images of the NNP's Marthinus van Schalkwyk walking along South Africa's borders and promising to seal them against illegal immigrants were flashed across our television screens. Clearly immigrants are not only stereotyped in the media; they are branded as potential criminals, drug smugglers and murderers by politicians, and unreliable figures are bandied around parliament. The government has also been criticised for its legislation and its focus on reducing the number of immigrants through repressive measures. The Immigration Act 2002, for example, gave police and immigration officers the power to stop anyone and ask them to prove their immigration status. The 1999 White Paper also contained provisions for a "community enforcement policy" of the detection, apprehension and deportation of undocumented migrants, which could be construed as representing a form of state-sanctioned xenophobia; however this section was dropped by the time the bill was re-submitted for comment in 2002. Significantly, while the bill was replete with clear and explicit law enforcement measures to reduce immigration, conspicuous in their absence were specific strategies to prevent xenophobia or to protect and promote the rights of foreigners. Possibly the most contentious piece of legislation is the 1991 Aliens Control Act, amended in 1995 and 1996. It has been described as "an archaic piece of apartheid legislation, at odds with international human rights norms and the new South African constitution". The act has its roots in the 1937 Aliens Act, which was intended to exclude German Jews fleeing Nazi persecution from coming to South Africa, and has led to the term "alien" becoming synonymous with unwanted immigrant. Subsequent amendments of the act were almost invariably designed to increase the repressive power of officials, to place greater control on people's mobility, to circumscribe the legal rights of aliens and to extend the range of people to which the act applied. The term "alien" is unfortunate as it suggests that migrants do not belong, but also implies difference, strangeness and "otherness". The government must do more to combat not only xenophobia as a general concept, but also the specific negative attitudes directed towards other SADC countries. At present, it could even be accused of contributing to such attitudes as immigration authorities have been known to introduce tougher entry procedures (for example higher visa application fees, restriction of multiple entry visas, requirements to show bank statements and other documentation) for citizens of certain countries such as Mozambique and Zimbabwe. Such restrictions may instead result in more border jumpers among those denied formal entry, in more employers securing the cheap labour of such undocumented or illegal border jumpers and in greater exploitation and impunity by employers. The 1998 Refugee Act was somewhat more progressive, as it allows any person to apply for asylum and states that no person should be denied the right to apply. While the application is being processed, they are not allowed to work or access education. If, after six months, their status has not been determined, the applicant is entitled to apply for permission to work and receive education. However, the law is silent on whether other public services, for example housing and health care, can be accessed during this time and if these services should be delivered under the same conditions as to South Africans, for example, free primary health care. Once status is granted, all refugees are entitled to health care, to seek employment and to education. They are also entitled to rights enshrined in chapter two of the constitution, with the exception of political rights and rights to freedom of trade occupation and profession. The government has, on occasion, explicitly stated that foreigners have a definite potential to contribute to the local economy and, in some cases, the use of foreign labour may not only be positive but also necessary. All that remains is for this attitude to be translated into legislation and to allow it to permeate the public consciousness. This can be achieved through government- and NGO-led campaigns such as the Roll Back Xenophobia Campaign, which was launched in December 1998 by the SA Human Rights Commission, the National Consortium on Refugee Affairs and the UN High Commissioner for Refugees. A further option for the government would be to bestow a kind of legitimacy on immigrants as it did in September 1996, with a one-off indemnity that gave citizenship rights to undocumented migrants from SADC countries who could prove they had lived in South Africa for longer than five years, had a job, or had married a SA citizen and had no criminal record. The government is also bound, legally and morally, to a number of international conventions and treaties. Refugees first and foremost enjoy the protection afforded them by refugee law and the mandate of the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Article 4(a) of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, to which South Africa is a signatory, requires States' Parties to declare, among others, an offence punishable by law all dissemination of ideas based on racial superiority or hatred, incitement to racial discrimination, as well as acts of violence or incitement to such acts against any race or group of persons of another colour or ethnic origin. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1960) guarantees migrants a number of basic rights, including: the right to life; to not be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; to the liberty and security of person; to liberty of movement; to the freedom to choose ones residence for those lawfully within the territory of a state; and to the right to protection from arbitrary or unlawful interference with their right to privacy. The International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families (1990) guarantees fundamental rights to workers and their families, as well as equality before the Courts and Tribunals and to treat migrant workers not less favourably than nationals in respect of remuneration for employment and conditions of work in terms of employment. Emergency medical care and basic education are also guaranteed and regular migrant workers are to have the right to vote. What can South Africa do? First and foremost, it must be made clear that the primary challenge the government faces is an educational one, as it is unable to focus on any one group in society. It has a duty to provide citizens with vicarious knowledge of migrants, immigrants and refugees as people through the media. It would also be helpful to encourage a greater sense of continentalism and internationalism through the media and through the public pronouncements of opinion-makers. This can be achieved by working with schools, colleges and universities to include issues such as citizenship and xenophobia in their curricula, and to stress the positive impact that immigration can have on our economy and society, by using examples from countries such as the UK and Switzerland. The media must also play a vital role. As for specific government policy, it is obvious the government has to go beyond detecting, detaining and deporting migrants in order to tackle crime, disease and joblessness. These issues need to be treated completely separately from that of migration. One important aspect of xenophobia is the virtual absence of any sense of solidarity with other countries in SADC; the government must work with other SADC countries to improve, or even create, a real sense of regional consciousness among citizens and policy makers. It is also important to note that citizens seem prepared to accept and welcome non-citizens if their economic impact is demonstrably positive. Hence, skills and investor-friendly immigration policies would not be a difficult sell to citizens, and perhaps policy that favours period-specific immigrants over those with the intention of obtaining permanent residence. Neocosmos (2006) makes the following suggestion in this regard: If temporary residential and social rights were to be granted to all who wish to settle and work in South Africa, then after a period of one or two years, extension or even permanent residence could be provided solely on the basis of gainful employment. In this way migration could be regularised, police and other state agents would have less power over migrants, and the state would give a lead on democratic anti-xenophobic practices. At the same time any criminals could be more easily controlled as they would be traceable by the state. Moreover, such a demand is likely to gather widespread support as research shows that South Africans are likely to welcome foreigners whose economic impact is demonstrably positive. In relation to the fact that local governments provide service delivery for most refugees, it is also vital that they are familiar with refugee legislation as well as services and rights that refugee groups are entitled to as stated in the Refugee Act 1998, and that they disseminate such information to the community to avoid feelings of resentment. Finally, police and immigration officers must be trained and sensitised about human rights and, in particular, the rights of foreigners and refugees to enjoy freedom from discrimination and full protection from the SA Police Service. There should be an increased focus on diversity training in the service and attention should be paid not only to the quality of training, but to who gets trained, as station commanders have been disposed to send civilians and not those officers that come into contact most frequently with foreigners. Corruption should also be tackled within the police service and officers should be punished severely for any abuse of foreigners or the immigration system as a whole. This approach should be expanded to the criminal justice system as a whole, where citizens should be punished to the full extent of the law for racially motivated crimes and attacks on foreigners.
|
Social bookmarking allows users to save and categorise a personal collection of bookmarks and share them with others. This is different to using your own browser bookmarks which are available using the menus within your web browser.
Use the links below to share this article on the social bookmarking site of your choice.
Read more about social bookmarking at Wikipedia - Social Bookmarking
Use the links below to share this article on the social bookmarking site of your choice.
Read more about social bookmarking at Wikipedia - Social Bookmarking
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Digg
Delicious
Newsvine
Facebook
muti
Twitter
| Breaking News | Most Read Stories |
|
|
| Entertainment | Motoring | |
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
