High court blasts refugee administration
THE NORTH Gauteng High Court in Pretoria has issued a scathing indictment of the quality of administrative decision-making in South Africa’s asylum-seeker process.
Judge AJ Dodson was handing down judgment in the matter of FNM v the Refugee Appeal Board and Others.
The applicant in the matter was an asylum seeker who fled from the conflict-ridden eastern region of the Democratic Republic of Congo and sought refuge in South Africa in 2013.
During his interviews before the Refugee Status Determination Officer, the applicant was not provided with competent interpretation and as such, much of the crux of his claim for asylum was lost, leading to the rejection of his application.
The Refugee Appeal Board (RAB) further rejected his appeal without providing him with a hearing, despite the procedural irregularities inherent in the initial process or applying an inquisitorial approach to their decision-making as required by law.
Lawyers for Human Rights launched these judicial review proceedings on his behalf, to challenge the procedural and substantive unfairness of these decisions.
In his judgment, Judge Dodson chastises the RAB for failing to adopt the requisite inquisitorial and facilitative approach in its interview with the applicant and failing to make use of its full powers under the Refugees Act.
The courts have in the past criticised the Department of Home Affairs for failing to give effect to asylum seekers’ right to just administrative action and exercise the powers afforded to it by the Refugees Act.
In his ruling last week, Judge Dodson also criticises the RAB for focusing only on information which favoured the applicant’s return to the DRC, suggesting a predetermination of the outcome of his claim, before even affording him a thorough hearing.