The 49 refugees who left the country for the US cannot be deprived of their SA citizenship, an immigration lawyer says.
As the group arrived in the US on Monday, SA immigration lawyer Chris Watters said they cannot have it both ways, meaning they could not use the SA embassy’s services while in the US.
“By definition, they are fleeing because they cannot get protection from the SA government (or the government refuses to give them protection) in respect of the serious harm they face in SA.
“They cannot have it both ways,” he said, adding that leaving the country also meant that they could not travel on their SA passports as that would be invoking the protection of the SA government should they need consular assistance.
Realistically, Watters said, there was no way of knowing what arguments and/or evidence each of the applicants had put to the US authorities to justify claims that they had “fled” the country because they feared persecution and serious harm in SA on account of their race, ethnicity or political opinion if they had to return.
Watters said the UN refugee convention stipulates that the refugee determination process has to be strictly confidential.
“These claims are both forward-looking and backward-looking. So, the case for each would be made out on the basis of what they claim has happened to them, their family or friends in the past in SA,” he said.
He said the recent Constitutional Court ruling on dual citizenship confirmed that no South African may be deprived of their citizenship.
He added that any of the group may return to SA at any stage, which would mean, though, that they would be abandoning their refugee status. He added that at a certain point they might qualify to naturalise as US citizens.
“If/once the parents naturalise, the children automatically become US citizens,” he said.
On Tuesday, international relations and co-operation (Dirco) minister Ronald Lamola said that in line with the international definition, the group did not qualify for refugee status as there was no persecution of white Afrikaners.
Lawyers for Human Rights declined to comment on the status of the group.
“Any questions about Afrikaners going to the US as refugees should be put to the US embassy itself, because the US definition of a refugee has deviated from the internationally established legal definition and applicable legal framework,” the organisation said.
Dirco spokesperson Chrispin Phiri confirmed that in terms of section 20 of the constitution, no South African may be deprived of their citizenship.
TimesLIVE
