Home Affairs Minister Dr Aaron Motsoaledi is correct to appeal against the judgment by the Gauteng High Court which found his prerogative to terminate the Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) invalid, unlawful and unconstitutional.
The judgment irks some in society and spoils the social cohesion project. Surely, an appeal would contain a rapidly developing consternation for sanity to prevail?
The court presupposes there is a need for consultation whenever the government elects to control an influx of undesirable people. In this case, the government proactively regularised undocumented Zimbabweans and offered them a temporary stay, with a dispensation to explore other immigration options at their disposal.
The ZEP provides its holder with the status to sojourn in the country for a stipulated period. That is why a holder will be guilty of an offence if the permit has expired. The question of consultation doesn’t arise. Likewise, any expectation of citizenship or an equivalent option by a holder is mischievous and illegitimate. Nowhere in the world would a competent court have entertained such a defective petition.
How can people who fled their country feel entitled to demand conditions of stay from a host country outside the act of goodwill extended to them? The reality is that there are a few ZEP holders against a multitude of illegal migrant workers and hawkers suffocating the economy and public health care.
The status quo will have had long-term consequences for citizens. Yet, an aloof judiciary arrogated to itself some power to govern the country through unintelligible judgments. That is a recipe for state paralysis.
* Morgan Phaahla, Ekurhuleni.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Do you have something on your mind; or want to comment on the big stories of the day? We would love to hear from you. Please send your letters to [email protected].
All letters to be considered for publication, must contain full names, addresses and contact details (not for publication)