Hon Deputy Speaker, Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, colleagues, hon members and the Home Affairs team, the democratic South African state has an unwavering and steadfast commitment to the protection of refugees as described in international conventions and protocols, as well as in our own laws. Indeed, our democracy is defined by respect for human rights and the protection of the vulnerable.
The Refugees Amendment Bill before you is therefore intended to streamline the process of application for asylum by making it more efficient, easy and credible for those who seek our protection. We should not subject those genuinely seeking asylum to long, protracted processes. At the same time, we would like to be firm and very strict with those who are abusing the asylum system, knowing very well that they are not refugees.
In terms of the current legislation, the Refugee Status Determination Officer, the person who determines whether a person qualifies as a refugee or not, is a very junior person who takes that decision alone. This is a very big decision to be taken by one person, who is also very junior. This contributes to inefficiencies and sometimes corruption.
We are therefore proposing that this be done by committees which will decide on the status of the applications. Members of these committees will have different expertise to adjudicate such matters; for example, they might have knowledge of international relations, politics and current affairs. They will make these decisions as a collective, and efficiently, and restore the integrity of our process.
An application for asylum can have one of three possible outcomes: acceptance, rejection as manifestly unfounded, or rejection as unfounded. South Africa adheres to internationally accepted reasons for granting asylum status. Please indulge me as I explain what these are.
The first is when a person has a well-founded fear of being persecuted by reason of his or her race, gender, tribe, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group, is outside the country of his or her nationality and is unable or unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country, or, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his or her former habitual residence, is unable or, owing to such fear, unwilling to return.
The second is when there is external aggression, occupation, foreign domination or other events seriously disturbing public order in either a part or the whole of his or her country of origin or nationality, and he or she is compelled to leave his or her place of habitual residence in order to seek refuge in another place outside his or her country of origin or nationality. The third is when the person is a spouse or dependant of a person contemplated in points one or two.
If the reasons for an application are outside the aforementioned parameters, an application is considered manifestly unfounded and according to the proposed amendments will be reviewed by the director-general, and if the director-general is in agreement, then that person will be deported.
If the applicant uses the aforementioned reasons, but during the interview it becomes very clear that he or she is not telling the truth, such an application is declared unfounded and the applicant has the right to appeal.
As things stand, an appeal process takes years to finalise. Therefore, we are amending this and proposing an Appeals Authority that can meet simultaneously in groups at different centres to consider applications, which will go a long way towards expediting the process. The implementation of such proposals will cut short the waiting period and it will be easy to reconcile the findings of the Status Determination Committee and what the director-general has done, as well as the appeals.
If the appeal is unsuccessful, obviously the person will go back to his own country. If the application is successful, then the person stays in South Africa until such time as the reasons that made him leave his country are over. We are also making an amendment, and proposing that a child born of an asylum-seeker should be registered in terms of the Births and Deaths Registration Act in South Africa. The certificate should be submitted to the refugee centre so that that child can be recorded as a dependant of that refugee.
Finally, the amendment will also ensure that refuge status granted erroneously by the Status Determination Committee either in good faith or in bad faith can be reviewed.
Hon Deputy Speaker, with this having passed through the various stages of deliberation in the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, we now hope that members of this House will vote in favour of the proposed amendments. The favourable approval of the members of the House will indeed ensure that South Africa upholds its commitment to human rights, as well as its international obligations.
I would like to conclude by expressing my appreciation to the chair of the portfolio committee, Mrs Maggy Maunye, as well as other members of the portfolio committee for their tireless efforts in working on the amending Bill to ensure that it will maintain South Africa's reputation as a champion of human rights, as well as the dignity of those who seek refuge and safety upon our shores. I thank you.