South African authorities have been issued a stern admonition by the judiciary over their decision to terminate the Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) scheme. A panel of three esteemed judges at the Pretoria High Court has branded the termination as illegal, unconstitutional and null and void.
The decision by the Home Affairs Minister was cast into serious doubt after the court ordered him to re-evaluate the matter, adhering strictly to fair procedures aligned with the relevant laws.
Whilst this review takes place, the permits will retain their validity for an extra year, culminating at the end of June 2024.
Moreover, those individuals in possession of Zimbabwean Exemption Permits will be protected from potential arrest and deportation.
The legal proceedings were kick-started by the Helen Suzman Foundation and the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa, following the minister’s 2021 announcement regarding the cessation of the permit programme.
The minister, notwithstanding the subsequent extensions, staunchly held his ground that the 178,000 permit holders would have to apply for alternative visas, assuming they were eligible, or return to their countries of origin.
In the eagerly awaited ruling on Wednesday, Judges Colleen Collis, Gcina Malindi, and Mandlenkosi Motha took the minister to task for failing to solicit feedback from those affected prior to making the decision.
They underscored that the original appeal for contributions was carried out “post-decision”, negating any pretence of genuine consultation.
The judges conveyed that the solicitation was essentially empty rhetoric, offering little meaningful opportunity for the impacted parties to express their concerns.
In their deliberation, the judges discerned a “noticeable contempt for the value of public participation” in the affidavit submitted by the department’s director-general. The judiciary found the minister’s decision to conclude the programme as procedurally unfair and irrational due to the lack of engagement.
They stressed that the minister failed to assess the repercussions of his decision on ZEP holders and their offspring.
