Helen Suzman Foundation

• Hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans have flocked to South Africa to escape economic hardship since the 1990s.
• The South African government has, since 2010, granted the migrants a special permit to live and work in the country.

What is the Zimbabwe Exemption Permit?

• It was succeeded by the Zimbabwe Special Permit that was, in turn, replaced by the Zimbabwe Exemption Permit, effective from September 2017 to December 2021.
• The Zimbabwe Exemption Permit, like the one it replaced


Holders could not change the conditions of the permit in South Africa. Similar exemptions were previously granted to people from Lesotho and to Angolan refugees.

How many people have the permit?

• There are 178,412 Zimbabwe Exemption Permit holders, drawn from three waves of Zimbabwean migration to South Africa since the 1990s.
• Some entered between 1994 and 1997, just after apartheid ended.
• There was an influx in 2000 as Zimbabweans fled from an economic and political crisis.

Why is the matter in court and what are the contested issues?

• Permit holders would have to either return to Zimbabwe or apply for visas allowing them to work.
• The Helen Suzman Foundation, a think-tank promoting human rights and constitutional democracy, is challenging the November 2021 announcement on behalf of some of the permit holders.
• Three other entities, the Zimbabwe Immigration Federation, the Zimbabwean Exemption Permit Holders Association and the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa, have mounted separate court challenges.
• The Helen Suzman Foundation is partly arguing for the court to rule that the Minister of Home Affairs’ decision was unconstitutional.
• It is also arguing for a fair process in respect to the permit holder’s children’s rights to family unity, stability and schooling.

What, in your view, is the correct position?

• More than anything, this debate has exposed the challenges arising from the formulation of temporary policies that operate outside the confines of the Immigration Act.
• Clearly, the permit was designed as a contingency plan in response to the reality of mass migration.
• Instead they are focusing more on issues of constitutional validity or procedure, rationality, and fairness of government action.

How should the issue be resolved?

• This has not yielded much as 97% of the 178,412 permit holders have still not applied for alternative visas.
• That way, the permit holders might finally be able to pursue more durable and alternative solutions and get some closure.