The African Diaspora Global Network says the South African government has “betrayed” its own citizens by failing to hold Zimbabwe accountable for governance failures that have driven millions of Zimbabweans to seek livelihoods across the border, placing pressure on communities, jobs and public services in South Africa.
The organisation, which says it advocates for marginalised and displaced Africans, filed an application before the High Court in Pretoria against both the South African and Zimbabwean governments, arguing that Pretoria’s inaction has effectively enabled a humanitarian and governance crisis with consequences for citizens of both countries.
According to Chairperson of the organisation, Dr Vusumuzi Sibanda, both governments have been served with court papers.
Read: https://cite.org.zw/diaspora-group-sues-zimbabwe-and-south-africa-over-migration-crisis/
On this topic
Outlining the basis of their legal challenge, the organisation accused South Africa of failing to confront Zimbabwe over alleged governance deficiencies, human rights violations and economic conditions that have pushed many Zimbabweans to migrate southwards over several decades.
“The people of South Africa feel, rightfully so, betrayed by the government of South Africa which is not addressing or calling to order the government of Zimbabwe for causing its people to flee their country to try eke a living in South Africa where some South Africans feel the space for them to exist has thinned down due to this influx,” Dr Sibanda said.
He argued that migration from Zimbabwe to South Africa did not begin recently, but has roots stretching back to the 1980s.
“That influx started way back in the 80s during the Gukurahundi (genocide) and worsened between 2000 to 2008,” said the chairperson.
Zimbabwe has experienced successive waves of migration over the past four decades, driven by political violence, economic decline, hyperinflation, unemployment and recurring political crises.
South Africa remains home to the largest Zimbabwean diaspora population, with many migrants doing domestic work, working in agriculture, mining, construction and the informal sector.
However, the presence of large numbers of migrants has also become a contentious political issue in South Africa, where high unemployment levels, service delivery challenges and rising living costs have fuelled anti-immigrant sentiment and periodic outbreaks of xenophobic violence.
Dr Sibanda said the South African government should have exercised greater diplomatic pressure on Zimbabwe to address what it describes as the root causes of migration.
“The government of South Africa in our view has allowed South Africa to be a victim of the government of Zimbabwe and by extension the people of South Africa and Zimbabwe have all suffered or are suffering as a result,” he said.
He also alleged Zimbabwe has insulated itself from international scrutiny by failing to ratify certain instruments that would allow citizens to challenge state actions before regional and international bodies.
“Zimbabwe is a state that is above any law as it sets its own laws to trump over its people and has not ratified the instruments that make it possible for its people to report and challenge such actions at the regional or international bodies like AU and UN,” Dr Sibanda said.
“But it commits gross human rights violations where it governs without the authority of the majority and keeps stripping its people of its rights and human dignity.”
Dr Sibana linked their court challenge to broader concerns about governance trends across Africa, saying citizens on the continent are increasingly frustrated by corruption, state capture and weak accountability mechanisms.
“We note with great concern the general unrest and unhappiness of the African people due to poor governance, kleptocracy and capture of state entities in many African states where a few corrupt individuals control state resources for personal gain,” he said.
The African Diaspora Global Network said it supported accountability initiatives such as South Africa’s recent commissions of inquiry and praised individuals willing to expose alleged abuses of public resources despite facing criticism.
“… we have resolved as a first step to take the governments of Zimbabwe and South Africa to court for many failures that obviously betray the trust of the people and their confidence in government institutions and constitutionalism,” Dr Sibanda said.
He also criticised Zimbabwe’s ongoing constitutional reform process, arguing that proposed changes risk weakening democratic safeguards.
“The Constitutional Amendment currently in play in Zimbabwe is an attempt in our view to restore the document that sank Zimbabwe from 1980 to 2013, which was a licence for that government to abuse and do as it pleases to the people without recourse and our court application proves this,” he stated, adding that unresolved historical grievances continue to shape Zimbabwe’s political landscape.
“The genocide in Zimbabwe between 1982 to 1987 has never been addressed.”
Dr Sibanda noted that principles of constitutional democracy and human rights should supersede rigid interpretations of state sovereignty where governments are accused of abusing their citizens.
“The onslaught on constitutional democracy and human rights law trumps state sovereignty or else no one will hold to account governments like the Zimbabwean government, which has the Executive controlling all arms or organs of the state trumping the principle or doctrine of trias politica,” he said.
The organisation described its legal action as a test of whether courts can respond effectively to transnational human rights concerns.
“We therefore have filed an extraordinary High Court application in Pretoria, to test the elasticity and responsiveness of our legal systems to deal with the preservation of human dignity and the rule of law without being bound by clauses like sovereignty to justify unjustifiable abuse of human rights and life,” Dr Sibanda said.
“We know that law at its best will not shy away from dealing with humanitarian issues and the protection of the powerless from states that abuse their own people, and therefore we also appreciate that crimes of mass murder or murder in general do not prescribe.”
Leave a Reply