Saidi and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (CCT107/17) [2018] ZACC 9; 2018 (7) BCLR 856 (CC); 2018 (4) SA 333 (CC) (24 April 2018)

Saidi and Others v Minister of Home Affairs and Others (CCT107/17) [2018] ZACC 9; 2018 (7) BCLR 856 (CC); 2018 (4) SA 333 (CC) (24 April 2018)

The majority held that the Refugee Reception Officer has the power to extend temporary asylum permits pending the finalisation of judicial review proceedings under PAJA. This interpretation is required by the constitutional imperative to protect rights to life, dignity, access to courts, and just administrative action, and by South Africa's international law obligations, particularly the principle of non-refoulement. The majority found that 'outcome' in section 22(1) of the Refugees Act includes the result of judicial review, and that the RRO's power to extend permits is not discretionary in this context but must be exercised to ensure protection until all remedies, including judicial...

Citation
[2018] ZACC 9
Parties
Applicant: Cishahayo Saidi and 28 Others; Respondent: Minister of Home Affairs; Respondent: Director General, Department of Home Affairs; Respondent: Manager, Cape Town Refugee Facility
Court
Constitutional Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 April 2018
Case Number
CCT 107/17
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From the Supreme Court of Appeal, After High Court and SCA Decisions
Outcome
Appeal upheld; cross-appeal dismissed; orders of the Supreme Court of Appeal and High Court set aside and substituted.
Judges
Zondo ACJ, Cameron J, Froneman J, Jafta J, Kathree Setiloane AJ, Kollapen AJ, Madlanga J, Mhlantla J, Theron J, Zondi AJ
Legal Topics
Refugees Act Interpretation, Non Refoulement, Permit Extension Powers, Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, Bill of Rights Limitation
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Refugees Act Interpretation Non Refoulement Permit Extension Powers Promotion of Administrative Justice Act Bill of Rights Limitation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cishahayo Saidi and 28 Others

Applicant

Minister of Home Affairs

Respondent

Director General, Department of Home Affairs

Respondent

Manager, Cape Town Refugee Facility

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal and Cross Appeal From the Supreme Court of Appeal, After High Court and SCA Decisions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does a Refugee Reception Officer have the power to extend a temporary asylum permit pending judicial review of a refusal of asylum?
  2. 2 Is the renewal of the permit automatic or subject to the exercise of discretion by the Refugee Reception Officer?
  3. 3 Does the interpretation of the Refugees Act align with constitutional rights and international law obligations, particularly non-refoulement?

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the Refugee Reception Officer has the power to extend temporary asylum permits pending the finalisation of judicial review proceedings under PAJA. This interpretation is required by the constitutional imperative to protect rights to life, dignity, access to courts, and just administrative action, and by South Africa's international law obligations, particularly the principle of non-refoulement. The majority found that 'outcome' in section 22(1) of the Refugees Act includes the result of judicial review, and that the RRO's power to extend permits is not discretionary in this context but must be exercised to ensure protection until all remedies, including judicial...

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; cross-appeal dismissed; orders of the Supreme Court of Appeal and High Court set aside and substituted.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal and cross-appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is upheld.