Summary
The International Commission of Jurists calls on President Cyril Ramaphosa, the South African police and relevant government agencies to protect non-citizens, dismantle vigilante networks and uphold South Africa’s constitutional and international human rights law obligations.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is deeply concerned by the escalating anti-migrant mobilization in South Africa, which has been marked by xenophobic rhetoric, threats and attacks targeting non-citizens. Vigilante groups, such as Operation Dudula and March and March, have engaged in campaigns publicly calling for all “undocumented” non-citizens – and in some cases even foreign nationals whose presence in the country is compliant with domestic legislation – to leave the country by 30 June. Reported harassment incidents, attempts by private persons to “verify” people’s identity documents at their workplaces and public health clinics, and efforts to exclude non-citizens from basic services have accompanied these vigilante groups’ campaigning, contributing to a climate of fear and exclusion.
These developments give rise to serious concern about the protection of human rights guaranteed under South Africa’s Constitution, including the rights to dignity, equality and security of the person, as well as pursuant to the country’s binding obligations under international human rights law to prevent discrimination, protect all persons from violence and ensure equal protection of the law without distinction.
While the ICJ welcomes President Cyril Ramaphosa’s affirmation that immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the State – and not of private actors – the human rights organizations call on State actors, including the Department of Home Affairs and the police, to take active steps to ensure that immigration enforcement is not carried out by private individuals.
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Programme stated, “No private individual or organization has the authority to enforce immigration laws or determine who belongs in South Africa. The continued operation of groups that openly target, intimidate and seek to exclude non-citizens raises serious concern about the failure of State authorities to take effective measures to prevent xenophobic violence, protect communities at risk and hold those responsible for hate-based intimidation and unlawful conduct accountable.”
The courts in South Africa have repeatedly been called upon to address the consequences of xenophobic vigilantes. On 4 November 2025, in Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia and Others v. Operation Dudula and Others – in which the ICJ intervened as an amicus curiae – the High Court of South Africa (Gauteng Division, Johannesburg) handed down judgment finding Operation Dudula and its leadership guilty of engaging in intimidation, harassment and incitement of hate speech and violence on the grounds of nationality, social origin and ethnicity. The High Court further prohibited the group from demanding identity documents from members of the public or otherwise taking the law into their own hands.
In separate but related legal proceedings brought by the Treatment Action Campaign, Médecins Sans Frontières, Kopanang Africa Against Xenophobia and others concerning vigilante groups’ obstruction of access to healthcare facilities, the courts have similarly been called upon to address the denial of essential services to migrants and other persons at risk.
These recent developments involving the actions of vigilante groups must also be understood against the backdrop of the government’s recent response to rising anti-migrant mobilization, including recent statements by President Cyril Ramaphosa on 8 June. Worryingly, he noted that:
“The Department of Home Affairs, Border Management Authority, South African Police Service and other law enforcement agencies have been and will intensify the process of identifying and deporting undocumented foreign nationals residing illegally in South Africa.”
While the President also stated that “South Africans are not xenophobic”, framing migration primarily through enforcement and deportation risks lending legitimacy to vigilante groups and their xenophobic rhetoric and actions and further undermining the State’s binding legal obligations to protect all persons, regardless of nationality or immigration status. Ramjathan-Keogh commented, “It is highly regrettable and deeply concerning because with his statement the President may be viewed as acceding to and supporting the demands of vigilante groups.”
South Africa’s Constitution explicitly guarantees and requires the protection of the rights to dignity, equality and security of all people within the country’s border’s, regardless of nationality or immigration status.
At the international level, as a State party to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), South Africa is also legally obliged to prevent discrimination, combat hate speech and violence and protect all persons within its jurisdiction from xenophobic attacks.
The ICJ notes that the current anti-migrant climate in South Africa should be highly concerning to the authorities given the country’s history as a leader in the global struggle against racism and discrimination. In 2001 South Africa hosted the UN World’s Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance (WCAR). Since then, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development created a National Action Plan (NAP) to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. These commitments require more than symbolic endorsement; they require concrete action to prevent hate, protect communities at risk and ensure accountability for those who incite or engage in discriminatory conduct. With respect to this, the High Court’s November 2025 order in the Kopanang case has now made implementation of the NAP — including the establishment of an early warning and rapid response mechanism for xenophobic incidents — not merely a policy commitment but a binding legal obligation.
Despite this, the concerns raised today are not new. In its submission to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination in November 2023, the ICJ questioned South Africa’s compliance with its obligations under the Convention, particularly in relation to persistent xenophobia and discrimination against non-citizens. Among other things, the ICJ underscored the need for strengthened accountability mechanisms, effective prevention of xenophobic violence and greater protections afforded to non-citizens in areas such as access to work.
Public officials have a heightened responsibility to avoid language and policy framing that may legitimize xenophobia or discrimination, even unintentionally. The ICJ therefore calls on President Cyril Ramaphosa, the South African Police Service and other government authorities to take immediate and concrete steps to address xenophobic violence and vigilantism. This includes:
- Publicly and unequivocally condemning xenophobic mobilization;
- Complying with and enforcing the High Court’s November 2025 order in the Kopanang case, including the full implementation of the NAP;
- And ensuring proactive policing to prevent intimidation and obstruction of access to services; and investigating and prosecuting individuals and groups that threaten, harass, and otherwise unlawfully target migrants and non-citizens.
In addition, the ICJ calls on the South African government to:
- Protect all persons from violence and harm;
- Ensure real accountability for perpetrators of this violence and harm;
- And ensure that all politicians are held to account when their rhetoric emboldens and encourages violence and harm.
“South Africa’s democratic values are founded on human dignity, equality and freedom. These principles must be protected for everyone, without discrimination,” said Ramjathan-Keogh. “The 30 June deadline imposed by these private groups creates some urgency for the State to actively mobilize to prevent harm while maintaining peace and security.”
Contact
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Africa Director Kaajal.Keogh@icj.org
