The Supreme Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by the minister of home affairs, who was ordered by the high court in Pretoria last year to grant citizenship to two brothers born in SA of foreign parents in the 1990s.
Brothers Joseph Emmanuel Jose and Jonathan Diabaka are entitled to South African citizenship even though their parents are Angolan.
This follows a ruling of the Supreme Court of Appeal on Tuesday, when it dismissed, with a punitive cost order, an application by the home affairs minister for leave to appeal against a court order that he grant citizenship to the two men, who were born in SA of foreign parents.
Joseph and Jonathan, born in SA in February 1996 and August 1997 respectively, have lived in the country their entire lives. Their parents are Angolan citizens who fled that country in 1995 and sought asylum in SA. The parents and children were granted refugee status in 1997.
This endured until January 2014 when the department informed the family that their refugee status had been withdrawn. When the status was withdrawn, Jose was 17 and Jonathan 16.
The department referred them to the Angolan embassy, where they were advised that to remain lawfully in SA, they had to apply for Angolan passports and failure to do that would result in “repatriation”.
The brothers have never been to Angola, they have no family there, know little about Angola, and neither speak any Portuguese.
When they experienced difficulties in applying for South African IDs, they approached Lawyers for Human Rights who advised them that they were eligible to apply for citizenship.
However, their efforts were not successful and they then applied to the high court in Pretoria to direct the department to grant them South African citizenship.
The court ordered the department to grant them citizenship in

March last year.
Dissatisfied with this order, the minister applied for leave to appeal to the SCA.
The high court granted leave only on the question of whether it was competent for the court to order the minister to grant, as opposed to consider, the brothers` applications for citizenship.
In the judgment passed on Wednesday, the SCA held that the brothers met the requirements for South African citizenship in terms of the Citizenship Act.
This is because they were born in SA of parents who are not South African and who have not been admitted into SA for permanent residence and that they have lived in SA from the date of birth until they became adult.
On the question of whether a court can direct the department to grant the men`s application for citizenship, the SCA said while the doctrine of the separation of powers must be considered, this did not mean that there might not be cases in which a court may need to give directions to the executive.
The SCA said given that it was clear that the men met all requirements for citizenship, it would serve no purpose to send the matter to the minister to make a fresh decision.
The SCA said a recent Constitutional Court judgment passed in July, which sets a precedent, affirmed that a court may direct the department to grant citizenship to an applicant.
The appellate court said though the precedent was set after the heads of argument -setting out the basis for the minister`s appeal - were filed, the department`s position ought to have changed.
The court said the department was obliged to reconsider its position.
For that reason, the SCA dismissed the minister`s appeal with costs on a punitive scale.
www.samigration.com V.3529

One of the highlighted topics: Critical Skills Visa.

- Key Insight: Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast track to working in South Afr...
- This matter relates to critical skills visa and its broader implications.
- Individuals are advised to seek professional guidance.

Is your profession on the Critical Skills List? This visa is your fast trac V.6139
Click here for full article

One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, became a victim of identity theft in 2012 when fraudulent transactions occurred, using her personal details.

-The Pretoria High Court found that the department of home affairs had violated constitutional rights without due process.
-Only half of Lawyers for Human Rights` test group has been unblocked, while 385 000 identities remain blocked nationwide.
-LHR appeals extension, urges affected people to seek help now.

Lawyers for Human Rights (LHR) are intensifying pressure on the department of home affairs over the national ID-blocking crisis, accusing the state of acting too slowly to unblock qualifying individuals despite a landmark court ruling.

In January last year, the Pretoria High Court found that the department`s practice of blocking IDs without due process was unlawful and unconstitutional. One of the applicants, Phindile Mazibuko, a Swati citizen and South African permanent resident since 1998, fell victim to identity theft in 2012 when fraudsters used her personal details.

 V.6133
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6128
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6129
Click here for full article

A Washington state mother and her 6-year-old son have been released after spending more than three weeks in US immigration detention due to a brief trip to Canada and a small paperwork mistake, her attorney told CNN on Saturday.

Sarah Shaw, a New Zealand citizen who has lived legally in the US since she arrived in 2021, was detained at the Blaine, Washington, Customs and Border Protection checkpoint when returning home after dropping her two oldest children off at the Vancouver airport for a flight to visit their grandparents in New Zealand. Shaw, 33, chose the flight out of Vancouver because it was direct and she didn`t want her children to have to navigate a layover alone, her attorney Minda Thorward, told CNN.

 V.6130
Click here for full article

On 22 July 2025, the Gauteng High Court dismissed Sitrusrand Boerdery`s review of the Department of Employment and Labour`s refusal to issue a Working Conditions and Salary Benchmarking Certificate, an essential precondition for obtaining corporate visas under the Immigration Act.

Acting Judge Kekana AJ held that the Department`s decision was lawful, rational and procedurally fair. This judgment illustrates how businesses can - and must - structure their corporate visa applications to meet statutory requirements, and how legal practitioners should prepare robust review challenges when administrative authorities decline to recommend foreign-work permits.

 V.6131
Click here for full article

The United States could forfeit an estimated 9.4 billion dollars in visitor spending over the next three years following the introduction of a new 250 dollars `visa integrity fee,` according to industry groups, who warn the policy risks undermining tourism and costing thousands of jobs.
The United States’ decision to introduce a 250 dollars `visa integrity fee` on international visitors has triggered sharp criticism from the global tourism industry, with officials warning that the measure could deter millions of travellers and cost the U.S. economy billions.
The 250dollar `visa integrity fee,` part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed on July 4, 2025, will take effect later this year. According to immigration law firm Envoy Global, it applies to all nonimmigrant visa holders which include students, tourists, temporary workers, and business visitors particularly from African countries. V.6132
Click here for full article

The Border Management Authority (BMA) has doubled its staff at Airports in South Africa , including immigration officers.

What does this mean for travelers? V.6127
Click here for full article

1. Right to Legal Representation•You have the right to consult with a legal representative.•Contact an immigration practitioner, legal aid clinic, or attorney urgently.•Do not sign any documents without understanding them fully. 2. Section 34 of the Immigration Act•You must be brought to court with 48 hours to confirm arrest but you can remain locked up very long as courts figure out what to do with you •If you`re found to be illegally in South Africa, you may be detained for up to 30 days (extendable by a magistrate) pending deportation.•BUT this cannot happen arbitrarily. You must be informed of your rights, and Home Affairs must follow due process.- becomes a nightmare , you could lose your job , business , place to stay V.6121
Click here for full article

Driving for Bolt, Uber, Mr D, or Checkers Sixty60?If you`re undocumented, you`re risking more than just your income.The Risks if You`re Not Legal: - Vehicle impoundment - Heavy fines - Arrest & deportation - Permanent bans from working in SA V.6122
Click here for full article