FOR THE ATTENTION OF ZEP HOLDERS ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA

TO ALL ZEP HOLDERS
FROM THE ZIMBABAWE IMMIGRATION FEDERATION (NPC), hereinafter referred to as ZIF.

ZIF is a registered NPC (NPC reg No. K2022214337 & Tax Reg No. 9240062266) incorporated by three directors as shown below.
Gremma Mugota
Gift Karimireni
Vindiren Magadzire (who signed the founding affidavit for the ZIF case agaist the DHA Minister and others)

Tha mandate of the Zimbabwe Immigration Federation is to source legal representation for ZEP holders for mitigation against the decision of the South African DHA minister to terminate the ZEP permits. ZIF is against illegal immigration in South Africa, hence all the work being done to ensure that ZEP holders do not add to the illegal immigration crisis already facing South Africa.

We filed our first challenge to the DHA minister’s decision at the High Court of South Africa last year, deemed Part A, under case number 2022-006386 where the court ruled in our favour by granting us interim relief pending the filing our our second challenge deemed part B.

The Part A case challenged the minister’s decision to terminate the ZEP permits without considering the consequences to the ZEP holders and their immediate families. Having stayed in South Africa for more than 12 years, ZEP holders have established their lives in South Africa. Some have bought houses, some cars, some have children in school and university, some have children that were born in South Africa and have never been to Zimbabwe, some have established businesses that can only operate and be successful in South Africa. The termination of the ZEP regime of permits meant that the holders would have to uproot the life that took them more than a decade to build in just 12 months (reduced to 9 months). We consulted with one of the high profile legal entities in South Africa (Erick Mabuza of Mabuza Attorneys) and one of the most prominent Legal Counsel (Adv Tembeka Ngcukaitobi).

What did not make legal and rational sense to ZIF was the reasons for the minister’s decision termination of the ZEPs as listed below…

1. That the exemptions granted to the Zimbabwean nationals was and has always been a temporary measure, pending the improvement of the economic situation in Zimbabwe.
2. That the DHA lacked capacity to handle the application of a new regime of permits for ZEP holders
3. That unemployment rate according to StatsSA had risen by 1.8%
4. That about 1900 ZEP holders (out of 178000) had violeted the terms and conditions of the ZEP by applying for waivers.
   These reasons above did not display the requirements of the section of the Immigration Act 13 of 2022 that the minister claimed to have given him the power to terminate the ZEP regime. Section 31(2)(b) of Immigration Act reads….
   “Upon application, the minister, as he or she deems fit, after consultation with the Board, may under terms and conditions determined by him or her – (b) grant a foreigner or a category of foreigners the rights of permanent residence for a specified or unspecified period when special circumstances exist which justify such a decision; provided that the minister may – (ii) FOR GOOD CAUSE, withdraw such right from a foreigner or a category of foreigners”

Looking at the above, the reasons for the minister’s reasons did not adequately demonstrate that the circumstances mentioned by the then Minister Gigaba for enacting the DZP in the first place had improved…
“This was a significant gesture of support and solidarity with our neighboring country of Zimbabwe in response to the large number of Zimbabweans residing illegally in South Africa due to political and economic instability there.” Minister Gigaba

Statistics and studies show that the ZEP impact to the unemployment rate in South Africa is slightly +/-0.03% as some of the ZEP holders are employers running their own projects and businesses and some of them were unemployed after the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. It is estimated that only 110000 ZEP holders remain in SA as some would have left South Africa and some would have been deceased. Currently there are 14 million unemployed people in South Africa and that includes the ZEP holders who are not illegal immigrations in SA as was the narrative being driven by sections of the authorities.

That the DHA lacked capacity to handle new applications also did not hold water as ZEP holders have always paid for the permits. If you multiply R1950 per applicant by the 178000 ZEP holders, it gives you R347.1m. If this would not be enough, the DHA would have simply increased the amount. This would also create employment for the unemployed South African citizens and eliminate the unemployment problems that the Minister claimed to be one of the reasons for the termination of teh ZEPs.

It also didn’t make sense that 1900 ZEP holders (out of 178000) or 1.06% who would have flouted the ZEP terms and conditions would become one of the reason for terminating the ZEPs for the 98.93% of the ZEP holders. It would be logical to punish the 1900 holders than to use that as a decision to punish everyone.

Our legal representatives also believed that the DHA minister had flouted the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA Act) which stipulates, amongst other things that…

• 2(2) Administrative action as the one taken by the minister in terminating the ZEPs required approval by the parliament
• 3 (1) Administrative action which MATERIALLY AND ADVERSELY AFFECTS THE RIGHTS OR LEGITIMATE EXPECTATIONS OF ANY PERSON MUST BE PROCEDURALLY FAIR
• 3 (2)(b) a procedurally fair administrative action is one where the administrator gives adequate notice of the nature and purpose of the administrative action
• 3 (3) The persons affected by any administration action an opportunity to obtain assistance and legal representation, present and dispute information and argumants and appear in person.
  Our Part A case was strategic in that it looked into the rights the ZEP holders were fast losing due to the frequent atterances of the DHA minister that ZEP holders would be forceably deported at the expiry of teh grace period offered to “move to other permit regimes”. Part A would seek interim relief pending the outcome of the Part B case to be filed at a later stage with the High Court of South Africa. Please follow the link below to see the High Court judgement in our Part A case.

Below is the link to the High Court hearing for our Part A case. Please note that the hearing is very long and would require big storage and wifi connection to download. Please note that the media has been calling all cases as Helen Suzman whereas there were 4 similar cases and ZIF was one of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-E-weqRamk&t=1883s

Our Part B case would be the main case in which ZIF would be seeking a more permanent solution to the ZEP holders including, but not limited to, an indefinite arrangement for the stay of ZEP holders in South Africa that ensures that ZEP holders and their families are not forced to leave the republic when they have built lives therein and have since passed their productive years.

As you may have heard, the DHA minister has appealed at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) against the ZIF High Court verdict that gave the ZEP holders interim relief pending the outcome of Part B. It is important that we challenge this appeal to safeguard our High Court verdict that lays the foundation for the main part B case. The DHA minister is trying to ensure that our Part B case is not heard as it presents teh ZEP holders with a chance to a more permanent arrangement that goes diametrically against his decision to terminate ZEPs.

We are therefore inviting interested ZEP holders to contact us via email or Whatsapp to join forces with ZIF and see the Part B case through the High Court of South Africa. Our chances to a more permanent solution are very high as the High Court would not have granted us interim relief if they did not believe that we did have a chance in our part B case. The Helen Suzman case only requested the minister to redo his decision by following the procedures of which if the minister decides, he can simply follow the procedure and still come back to the same decision to terminate the ZEP regime. The Hele Suzman case was very important to all ZEP holders as it bought us time but we need to use that time wisely and work towards launching our ZIF case soon after the hearing of the SCA appeal case.

All ZEP holders interested in participating in the ZIF Part B court case are invited to join us by sending a whatsapp to request to the following numbers…
+27672276286
+27719124146
+27781037263 (Ndebele)
+27733391037
+27656256136 (Members)
+27781090612
+27659013231 (Shona)
+27645559642
or the below email addresses…
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]