Asylum protests in South Africa turn violent
Vehicles were set alight and shops looted in Soweto and Durban after a court ruling widened access to the asylum process.
Follow-up to: South Africa withdraws directive on asylum applications Friday, 9 October 2026, 09:43
Protests over a ruling on access to asylum have turned violent in two South African cities. Police say at least 24 vehicles were set alight and three people were arrested in Durban. The government says the ruling does not automatically grant the right to remain.
In Soweto, near Johannesburg, ten vehicles were set alight; in Durban, the figure was fourteen, acting police commissioner Puleng Dimpane told the AP news agency. Shops were also looted in both cities. Police have increased the deployment of public-order units.
The unrest follows a July ruling by South Africa’s Constitutional Court. The court struck down procedural barriers that prevented some people from lodging asylum applications, for example because they had entered irregularly, did not have a transit visa or had missed a deadline.
According to the South African government, the ruling does not mean that everyone automatically receives refugee status or a permanent residence permit. Applications must still be assessed on their merits. The government says the procedural barriers could previously prevent possible persecution in the country of origin from being investigated.
Following the ruling, the Department of Home Affairs introduced a directive instructing intake offices to process new applications. The directive has since been withdrawn after the offices were overwhelmed, according to the government. The authorities say they need time to reorganise capacity, identity checks and processing.
According to AP, the protests in Soweto initially began peacefully at a Home Affairs office. Foreign shops were later attacked. A police spokesperson said there had been reports of shots being fired at demonstrators, but did not say who was allegedly responsible. The claim has not been independently confirmed.
In Durban, three foreign men were arrested on suspicion of attacking a demonstrator. Police are investigating whether the incident fuelled the escalation. There, too, it has not yet been established who carried out which acts of violence.
The events are unfolding against a backdrop of months of tensions over irregular migration. The government is simultaneously trying to implement a court ruling and restore the capacity of an overburdened asylum system. For South Africa, this puts not only migration policy at stake, but also the authority of the judiciary and public order.
The political outcome remains uncertain. The government says it respects the ruling, but warns of misinformation that it says is fuelling the protests. Human rights organisations will focus instead on whether withdrawing the directive once again obstructs access to a substantive asylum procedure.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The Constitutional Court struck down certain procedural barriers to access to the asylum process.
- Following the implementation of that ruling, intake offices became overwhelmed, according to the government.
- Protests in Soweto and Durban involved arson, looting and arrests.
- The government has withdrawn the implementation directive and says it continues to respect the court ruling.
Left
Arguments Access to a court-protected asylum procedure must be safeguarded, even when the government has poorly prepared its implementation. Violence must be prosecuted, but must not be used to collectively deny refugees and migrants access to protection.
Values Legal protection, equality before the law and international refugee conventions.
Consequences A retreating government could once again leave vulnerable people outside the system and increase tensions. Investing in reception and processing is necessary from this perspective.
Centre
Arguments The ruling must be implemented, but a state must also maintain control over registration, capacity and public order. The solution lies in phased processing, better checks and clear communication about the difference between applying for asylum and being granted asylum.
Values The rule of law, practical deliverability and administrative reliability.
Consequences Without extra capacity, chaos will result; without access to the procedure, there will be legal injustice. Both risks require attention at the same time.
Right
Arguments The government must first control the border and capacity before processing new arrivals. From this perspective, the ruling could increase abuse and pressure on public services, while violence and irregular migration should be tackled more firmly.
Values National control, security and protection of public services.
Consequences Broad access without sufficient enforcement could intensify social resistance and xenophobia. At the same time, ignoring the court ruling could undermine trust in the state.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The reporting clearly distinguishes between established events, statements by authorities and unconfirmed allegations. The legal significance of the ruling was checked against South African government and judicial sources.
- confirmed At least 24 vehicles were set alight during protests in Soweto and Durban, and three people were arrested in Durban. — AP cites police and local authorities. source
- confirmed The Constitutional Court struck down procedural barriers for some asylum applications. — Confirmed by the court and the Department of Home Affairs. source
- confirmed The ruling does not automatically grant refugee status or permanent residence. — Explicitly stated by the South African department. source
- uncertain Reports of shots may have fuelled the escalation. — AP reports this as a police spokesperson’s statement; independent confirmation is lacking. source
Editor's note
The protests, the number of vehicles reportedly set alight, the arrests and the legal background are certain. Reports of shots and the precise cause of the escalation are attributed to sources involved and have not been independently established.Sources
- Vehicles torched in South Africa as protests over asylum ruling rage on — AP
- Home Affairs notes Constitutional Court judgment on Refugees Act — South African Government
- Inter-Ministerial Committee on Migration on recent development on asylum seekers — South African Government
- Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town v Minister of Home Affairs — Constitutional Court of South Africa
The story so far
- Friday, 9 October 2026, 09:43 South Africa withdraws directive on asylum applications
- Friday, 9 October 2026, 19:45 Asylum protests in South Africa turn violent (this article)
More on this in Dutch media
- De Telegraaf — „zuid-afrika asiel”
- AD — „zuid-afrika asiel”
- de Volkskrant — „zuid-afrika asiel”