ActionSA has called for a sweeping overhaul of South Africa’s immigration system, proposing a strict annual cap of 10,000 new asylum grants and refugee recognitions as part of its submission on the Revised White Paper on Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection.
The party said the limit should be linked to the national budget and absorption capacity to ensure fair access for citizens while still protecting genuine refugees.
ActionSA Parliamentary Chief Whip Lerato Ngobeni said their submission confronts what she described as the consequences of weak enforcement and policy failures.
“Our system currently rewards non-compliance, undermines labour standards and national security, and leaves citizens competing for scarce resources in their own country.”
Ngobeni said the proposed 10,000 annual ceiling would be allocated by country and processing priority, with migration targets tabled before Parliament each year to strengthen oversight, fiscal planning and service delivery.
She reiterated the party’s support for enforcing the First Safe Country Principle, stating that “those who pass through safe third countries are ineligible to seek asylum in South Africa.”
She added that rejected claimants “should be deported promptly under clear procedures, with the cost of deportation covered by the embassies of their countries of origin, ensuring returns are lawful, efficient and humane.”
To address what it calls systemic management failures, ActionSA has proposed replacing Refugee Reception Offices with Integration and Repatriation Centres near borders and key inland hubs. The centres would temporarily house asylum seekers, provide basic services and limited work opportunities, and serve as controlled departure points for rejected applicants.
“By decoupling the asylum-seeker population from primary community resources in high-density urban areas, ActionSA wants this model to prevent the ‘competing fight for resources’ between migrants and local citizens. For rejected cases or those unsuitable for integration, the IRC would serve as a final departure point, ensuring direct and efficient repatriation from a controlled environment,” she added.
Ngobeni also proposed 12-month asylum permits subject to review, automatic revocation of refugee status if individuals return home, and enhanced biometric tracking.
“ActionSA proposed issuing traceable, biometric identification for all asylum seekers linked to the Intelligent Population Register. This system allows real-time verification, periodic reporting, and location monitoring, solving untraceable claimant issues while maintaining dignity and state security,” Ngobeni said.
She maintained that the proposals “demonstrate that South Africa can meet its humanitarian obligations while decisively prioritising its own citizens,” adding that the system should be “tough on abuse but accessible to those who follow the legal process and contribute meaningfully” to the country’s development.
The proposal triggered an immediate storm on X, with South Africans fiercely divided over whether the 10,000 annual cap is a necessary safeguard, or far too lenient in the face of mounting immigration pressures.
@SikhathiCharity urged ActionSA leader Herman Mashaba to reconsider the threshold.
“Mr Mashaba sir, I think you need to rethink your proposal sir. 10000 is a lot,we already have millions in the country. For now maybe we can accept asylum seekers from our neighbouring countries, of which at this moment No neighbouring country is at war. People can’t pass 10 to 15 Countries to come and get asylum in SA.. What does the law say?”
@NoSpinZA questioned whether the state has the institutional capacity to implement any cap at all.
“Reality check: South Africa does not have a functioning asylum system. It has a backlog-driven process with unpredictable outcomes. Applications accumulate, decisions take years, and rejections rarely lead to removal. What’s the plan for the thousands if not millions that are here awaiting processing and approvals?”
Others called for far more drastic measures.
@Kane_GM9 wrote: “We need to close the country like Saudi Arabia for like 30 years after this ANC mess so we can sort ourselves, we'll see those asylum seekers after 30-40 years!”
Meanwhile, @Neotjies1 argued that even 10,000 was excessive.
“Even a 1000 is too many- none of the countries that border RSA are in a war or conflict. Asylum seekers have to go to countries nearer to them so why skip all of Africa to come to South Africa. It should only be rare and very extreme countries so 100 is more than enough”
Echoing similar frustration, @Mtika36101742 posted: “South Africa shouldn't be taking anymore asylum seekers from anywhere in the world until the current disastrous immigration situation is sorted. We're already suffocating with the many foreigners we have from Africa, Europe, Asia and elsewhere.”
The reactions underscore how deeply polarising the immigration debate has become, with public opinion split between calls for tighter controls and concerns about whether the system can manage what is already in place.
The Star
masabata.mkwananzi@inl.co.za