The legal position of asylum seekers in South African social security system is more nuanced as a result of their transitional stay or status in the country. Asylum seekers may often be present in South Africa for a quite a long time but their social security entitlement is more restricted, and similar to that of temporary residents. For example, asylum seekers’ social security position is completely different from that of refugees. Refugees enjoy the same social security treatment similarly to South African citizens and permanent residents. Refugees qualify for the constitutionally entrenched right to have access to social security, including appropriate social assistance. Refugees also qualify for other socio-economic rights contained in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The exclusion of asylum seekers occurs despite the fact they are one of the vulnerable groups of noncitizens. Such exclusion forces asylum seekers to live under precarious conditions. It is fundamentally accepted that the drafters of the Constitution included the right to have access to social security, in order to ensure that everyone, irrespective of nationality and citizenship enjoys an acceptable standard of living. It is also fundamentally accepted that the right to have access to social security contained in section 27(1)(c) is limited by section 27(2) of the Constitution. Section 27(2) requires the State to take reasonable legislative measures, within its available resources, to achieve the progressive realisation of the right to have access to social security. The South African courts had on several occasions confirmed that the content of section 27(1)(c) is limited by section 27(2) of the Constitution and that the state cannot implement the right to have access to social security on demand. It had also been confirmed that the right to have access to social security is enforceable. This means the beneficiaries of this right may seek recourse from the courts of law when they are not satisfied about the progress relating to the implementation of the programmes relevant to the right to have access to social security. The right to have access to social security is also limited by section 36(1) of the Constitution. In the international arena, the right to have access to social security is recognised as the entitlement of everyone, but in some instances differential treatment can be made by the states. Such differential treatment should serve the legitimate state objective and all noncitizens should be treated equally.

With a number of international and intranational conflicts still unresolved and new ones arising, refugees will continue to be in need of protection. South Africa, known for its tolerant constitution, is likely to receive more asylum seekers in the future. This research seeks to investigate the experiences of refugees in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, as reported by practitioners assisting refugees in the area. The explorative study aims at examining the issues refugees commonly find challenging, describing positive and negative developments in the experience of refugees and discussing how their experience can be improved. An analysis of basic human needs theory serves as a framework for the study. The researcher conducted face-to-face interviews with the participants. The analysis of the data gathered emphasised the challenges refugees face in seeking to satisfy their needs. The main themes that were identified from the data include: a lack of knowledge and awareness about refugee issues and a misconceptions regarding different groups of migrants; current socioeconomic challenges in South Africa; xenophobia; refugees as a heterogeneous group; and refugee access to services. The challenges faced by refugees in Port Elizabeth were identified as access to justice and correct documentation, access to healthcare, housing and education, as well as xenophobia, police protection and crime. Recommendations were made regarding the improvement of the refugees’ experience, including educating public sector employees and government officials about refugee rights, sensitising communities about refugee issues, offering refugees language courses and providing them with an induction into their rights and employing translators in health clinics to improve access to healthcare.

Most scholars claim that international human rights norms embodied in formal international declarations and treaties have an important impact on domestic political interests and governmental practices. This reasoning about the impact of global human rights is often applied to the post-apartheid South African immigration and refugee policies. While I acknowledge that the ratification of United Nations Conventions on refugees has altered the traditional sovereignty considerations of South Africa towards asylum seekers, I take issue with the claims that South African refugee and asylum policies are primarily motivated and based on humanitarian considerations. Instead, I argue that these policies are based on sovereign considerations and strategic foreign policy interests. As a result this sovereign interests of South Africa to study has sought to demonstrate that largely explain decisions on the part accept or reject refugees. Although norms diffusion, international advocacy networks, and prestige factors have made a big impact, in practice the refugee policy has continued to reflect South Africa's strategic interests and domestic considerations at all levels. However, I have not argued that South Africa should overlook its national and foreign interests and abide by international human rights norms regardless of the cost of doing so. I have only sought to demonstrate that refugee protection is more when powerful national interests find it conducive to manage the destabilizing refugee flows.

The dissertation investigates South Africa’s legal aspects pertaining to voluntary repatriation of refugees. The repatriation of Mozambican and Angolan refugees was referred to in order to examine the loopholes in the process of repatriating them. This study moreover examines whether the application of the cessation clause is in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, which is intrinsically the cornerstone for voluntariness of repatriation. The analysis of international, regional and South Africa’s refugee protection framework demonstrates that South Africa affords refugees the protection required by international law. This has been compared with states’ practice and case law with regards to refugee protection in countries including Canada and the United Kingdom. Although South Africa, Canada and the United Kingdom have comprehensive legal framework governing refugees’ protection, refugees’ rights have been violated on numerous occasions. The dissertation consequently concludes that notwithstanding the presence of international, regional and domestic legislations, the rights of refugees are violated due to their vulnerability and the repatriation process ignores the principle of voluntariness on several occasions. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM

The dissertation investigates South Africa’s legal aspects pertaining to voluntary repatriation of refugees. The repatriation of Mozambican and Angolan refugees was referred to in order to examine the loopholes in the process of repatriating them. This study moreover examines whether the application of the cessation clause is in contravention of the principle of non-refoulement, which is intrinsically the cornerstone for voluntariness of repatriation. The analysis of international, regional and South Africa’s refugee protection framework demonstrates that South Africa affords refugees the protection required by international law. This has been compared with states’ practice and case law with regards to refugee protection in countries including Canada and the United Kingdom. Although South Africa, Canada and the United Kingdom have comprehensive legal framework governing refugees’ protection, refugees’ rights have been violated on numerous occasions. The dissertation consequently concludes that notwithstanding the presence of international, regional and domestic legislations, the rights of refugees are violated due to their vulnerability and the repatriation process ignores the principle of voluntariness on several occasions. / Public, Constitutional, and International Law / LLM