The Curious Case of the 1997 Exemption Permits
2021 has started on a busy note in terms of the South African immigration landscape. The Border Management Agency began its work having been signed into law by the president in December, a draft critical skills list has been published and now the Minister has vowed to take steps to review and investigate visas and permits irregularly issued over the years and its only February. It has been my expectation that the immigration in the post COVID-19 era would be characterised by a dramatic increase in enforcement activities of DHA. Already we have seen a more rigorous entry process and screening which is identifying those who are not complying with their respective visa conditions. On the 11th of February the Minister announced a review of those permits and visas that were issued over the years and especially permanent residence permits. The move comes after prominent figures such as the Bushiri`s were found to be in possession of a permanent residence status that was allegedly irregular or fraudulently obtained. The permit was purported to have been issued in 1997 however the Bushiri`s had only first arrived in 2009. In this week’s post I thought we should dive into this issue and shed some light as to why the Department would feel strongly about their case.
Fraudulent v Fraudulently obtained permits
Firstly I think its important to highlight the difference between a fraudulent permit and a fraudulently obtained permit. A fraudulent permit is simply a document that was not issued by DHA and is usually the product of some act of forgery. Often these permits can be identified by the marked difference in things like their font, colour and wording which would all point to a forgery. A fraudulently obtained permit is far more conspicuous in that it is issued by the department through an act of misrepresentation or corruption. This is often difficult to identify because on the face of it the permit is valid, in fact it would be valid in all respects except that it was obtained by an act of misrepresentation or corruption . This latter category is where we find most of these 1997 Exemption permits. So how exactly did these permits come into being and in such large numbers?
The Origins of the the 1996/1997 Exemption Permits
Post-independence as the new government worked to right the wrongs of the apartheid regime, several interventions were announced to register firstly citizens who had been disenfranchised through the homelands system and various acts which deprived black south Africans of their citizenship. These took place between 1994 and 1995, then in 1996, the government introduced a permanent residence program for all SADC nationals who had been working in South Africa pre-1994. The people were to be granted Permanent residence exemptions in terms of section 28 of the Aliens Control Act. The requirements for one to qualify for the exemption were, you had to have been in South Africa before 1994, on work permit, still working in SA, and be a SADC citizen. The motivations of this move were many but among these were pressure from unions whose membership was made up of these individuals, also the apartheid government discriminated against all persons of colour regardless of their origin so many of these people were part of the liberation movements and political formations.
Now what transpired thereafter is where the problem began. Not all people who applied collected their outcomes and because all these outcomes were held at various regional offices it became very easy for someone with a relationship with an Immigration Official to gain access to these. So many people were made to apply for this permanent residence long after it had been closed and many people were duped into believing that their documents were correctly issued. Moreover when they applied for Identity documents they were issued with these and when they travelled

no questions were asked of them. So many, like the Bushiri`s would believe that everything was ok.
Until the latest statement by the Minister there has been no acknowledgment from the Department of this serious breach in their documentation of persons. This despite several arrests and dismissals of officials within the department who had a hand in this very elaborate scheme. In fact these permits are well known within the ranks of DHA officials that certain offices have gained infamy for being the hotspots for these permits. However, despite this no positive action has been taken to inform the public of this grave breach. There have been several efforts to have people surrender these documents such as the Zimbabwe and Lesotho dispensation permit programmes however, these have not been as effective mainly due to the vague nature of the communication around their intentions. For starters the department would ask people to surrender their documents which they know to be fraudulent, but if I have been engaging with DHA all this time and no one tells me my permit may be fraudulent I will not know.
What does the Immigration Act say ?
So, what is a persons legal position when they fall victim of such a scheme. Unfortunately, the Immigration Act does not make this any easier. Section 29(1)(f) of the Immigration Act provides that any person who is found in possession of a fraudulent permit, visa, passport or ID is a prohibited person, not eligible for entry into, residence in and not allowed to apply for a visa. If that person presently holds a valid visa but becomes a prohibited person, that visa is withdrawn. Section 48 goes on to state No illegal foreigner shall be exempt from a provision of this Act or be allowed to sojourn in the Republic on the grounds that he or she was not informed that he or she could not enter or sojourn in the Republic or that he or she was admitted or allowed to remain in the Republic through error or misrepresentation, or because his or her being an illegal foreigner was undiscovered. Therefore, the unqualified argument that I did not know that my permit was fraudulently obtained does not prevent one from be detained and deported. Finally, section 49(14) makes committing any act of misrepresentation to gain residence in the country a criminal offence.
How do I fix this?
So how does one deal with such an issue or resolve it? The Act does provide an avenue in section 29(2) which allows a person in this person to apply to the director general to have their status as a prohibited person lifted on good cause. The Director General through the office of deportation coordination will deal with these matters on case-by-case basis. Not taking any action is certainly not advisable given that the Minister has already announced a warning bell on these and other fraudulently obtained permits and visas.
Conclusion
As a parting shot, I just want to say when it comes to immigration issues there are no short cuts. As tempting as it may appear to be the consequences of cutting corners are far more dire than the hassle of going through the motions. It’s always better to take the long road. Immigration issues such as fraudulent documents are extremely challenging to deal with, however not acting in the hope that they will go away is not a strategy. Eventually DHA always catches up.
How can we help you , please email us to info@samigration.com whatsapp me on:
+27 82 373 8415, where are you now? check our website : www.samigration.com

Please rate us by clinking on this links :
Sa Migration Visas
https://g.page/SAMigration?gm
www.samigration.com V.3885

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