A Congolese woman who experienced sexual violence in her home country but was denied asylum in South Africa is taking legal action. Her story of abuse by soldiers in her country, followed by further sexual exploitation while fleeing to South Africa, resulted in her suffering not being recognized, which may help create a more gender-sensitive asylum system.
The Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Africa (ISLA) and Legal Human Rights Advocates (LHR) filed a lawsuit in the Gauteng High Court in Pretoria. The case concerns a woman from South Kivu who endured prolonged sexual violence by armed forces in the DRC, and subsequently suffered at the hands of border officials in various countries during her flight.
The woman arrived in South Africa seeking protection, but the asylum system deemed her testimony implausible. The region she fled has suffered from armed conflict and systematic sexual violence against civilians for over thirty years. LHR representatives explained that the woman did not flee by choice, but because staying was incompatible with life.
The victim of further sexual violence during her escape arrived in South Africa around 2006–2007. Since she did not speak English, she managed to reach the Department of Home Affairs in Durban, where she was advised to return until she found someone to assist with communication. She returned, told her story, repeated it later in an interview, and a third time years later before the Refugee Appeal Board. However, she was told she was implausible due to inconsistencies in her account.
LHR stated that penalizing her for inconsistency was a re-infliction of harm. The woman was detained at the Lindela Repatriation Centre after being arrested for illegal stay, and she lived for years with expired or unresolved documentation.
ISLA and LHR are asking the court to review and overturn the Refugee Appeal Board's decision to deny asylum. They argue that this decision failed to adequately assess the gender-based violence she suffered as persecution under the Refugee Act and applicable international law. These organizations also call on the court to investigate systemic failures by refugee officials in dealing with women seeking protection in South Africa after fleeing war and sexual violence.
According to ISLA and LHR, returning her to her country of origin is not merely an administrative decision but potentially a death sentence. They emphasized that her case is not unique and reveals structural flaws in the system: the lack of gender-sensitive consideration in asylum cases, the 'credibility trap' that punishes trauma survivors, and the inability to recognize gender-based violence as a form of persecution.
It was noted that the asylum system was designed around the paradigmatic refugee, who is implicitly a man fleeing persecution as an individual political actor, and this approach proves insufficient for considering claims of gender-based persecution.
Gender-based persecution, including sexual violence by armed actors in conflict settings, was recognized as a form of persecution under the Refugee Act. The Maputo Protocol, ratified by South Africa, obligated the state to 'protect women seeking asylum, refugees, and internally displaced persons from all forms of violence, including rape.'
LHR stated that South Africa did not apply these frameworks to her case, using a standard of credibility developed without considering her circumstances, which led to her exclusion.
Both organizations stated that her implausibility was not related to trauma affecting her narrative, but rather that she needed protection more, given what she had experienced and what might happen to her upon return.
The story of one woman attempting to reunite with her partner across borders highlights the complex picture of migration processes in South Africa. This region stands at a crossroads, raising the question of the necessity to join forces to create conditions that allow people to remain in their home countries.
Amidst the flows of migrants between South Africa and its neighboring countries, a story linked to love unfolded. A woman from KwaZulu-Natal, wishing to stay with her partner from Malawi, attempted to cross the border under a false identity, but her plan failed.
When she arrived at the temporary repatriation point in Musina, she presented herself as Malawian. However, after questioning by Malawian officials, her story began to unravel. As a result, authorities returned her to South Africa, where her true identity was discovered, and hopes of reuniting with her partner through voluntary repatriation were dashed.
Governments are facing increasing pressure regarding the resolution of complex immigration issues. The South African government has already repatriated 53,449 foreign nationals, the majority of whom are Malawians.
As protests related to repatriation subside, more measured voices are being heard across the continent. It is encouraging to see the discussion moving beyond strong emotions and focusing on the economic aspects at stake. One woman from Zimbabwe recently stated in a podcast that millions of Africans migrate in search of work, security, education, or better economic prospects.
She supported the view that if more countries offer stronger economies, better governance, reliable public services, and opportunities for youth, many would prefer to build their future at home. It was noted that South Africa should not bear this burden alone. The entire continent must participate in solving the problem: African governments, regional bodies like the African Union, businesses, and communities all play a role in building a future where migration is a choice, not a last resort.
African leaders are called upon to take decisive steps to open doors of opportunity across the continent. The continent cannot continue to boast of its rich mineral wealth while so many people suffer from poverty and seek hope elsewhere. The time has come to address these issues.
By investing in agriculture and manufacturing, and prioritizing skills development for youth, African governments can lay the foundation for sustainable employment and a prosperous future. Policymakers must strive for improved governance and greater transparency in resource management so that the continent's mineral wealth truly contributes to the upliftment of its population. By supporting regional economic integration, investing in infrastructure, and expanding access to quality education and healthcare, Africa can become a place where people thrive without needing to leave.
A citizen and advocate for victims of gender-based violence (GBV) has sent an open letter to the current Director-General of the Department of Social Development (DSD) demanding an independent review of the activities of the Gender-Based Violence Command Centre (GBVCC).
The letter's author expressed deep concern that South Africa's response to gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) lacks sufficient transparency, accountability, and survivor-centricity. According to the Department's own reports, only a small fraction—typically between 2% and 5%—of all incoming calls are actually related to GBV, while many other inquiries pertain to various social services.
Despite this, the stated action plans have failed to adequately reflect the impact of this situation on the effectiveness of the GBVCC or the overall provision of GBVF services. Although the Department has not published consolidated annual call data for the GBVCC for 2025, parliamentary information indicates that the centre receives approximately 800 calls daily, demonstrating high demand for this service.
Despite billions of rands invested in legislation, national strategies, specialized programs, and funding mechanisms to combat GBVF, South Africa continues to face extremely high levels of violence against women and children. The author argues that the issue is no longer the absence of policy, but rather the insufficient measurability, accountability, and visible results of its implementation.
Independent assessments commissioned by the government have already revealed serious shortcomings in the GBVCC's operations. Classifying GBVF as a national catastrophe in South Africa was supposed to activate emergency systemic resources and elevate the issue to the highest state priority; however, the catastrophe status has not changed the state's approach to GBVF.
The GBVCC operates under the auspices of the Department of Social Development, where social workers are responsible for receiving and directing calls. However, the DSD has not provided detailed reports on the centre's outcomes and costs. Reliable GBV statistics are critical for transforming a crisis into measurable evidence that allows for resource allocation and holding institutions accountable.
An evaluation conducted by the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) showed that in the 2018/19 financial year, the GBVCC received 102,286 incoming contacts, of which only 6,905 were converted into cases, and 2,257 (2.2% of total contacts) were confirmed as related to GBV. Similarly, in 2017, the centre received 182,354 incoming contacts, but only 1,047 (0.6%) led to confirmed GBV cases. This evaluation also recommended reviewing the economic efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and digital model of the GBVCC.
The Department confirmed that the GBVCC handles numerous non-GBV related inquiries, including SASSA grant issues, adoption, family disputes, referrals to Home Affairs, substance abuse, and other social requests.
While SAPS crime statistics are important, they only reflect officially registered cases. Many organizations working directly with survivors warn that official data underestimates the true scale of GBV due to widespread underreporting and weaknesses in the justice system. SAPS itself acknowledges limitations in its administrative data: the Annual Report for 2024/25 noted a decline in public trust from 44.14% to 38.36%, negatively affecting crime reporting.
Furthermore, under the SAPS Strategic Plan (2020–2025), only 78.34% of GBVF-related complaints and 68.78% of domestic violence-related complaints were resolved within the stipulated 14-day period. This means that approximately one in five GBVF complaints and nearly one in three domestic violence complaints were not resolved according to the department's own standards.
In light of these findings, the author formally requests measures be taken to address this evident deficit in services for GBV victims. To overcome failures in combating gender-based violence, the government must urgently transition to an aggressive prevention and enforcement model that includes:
The author emphasizes that ending the cycle of violence requires a complete structural overhaul, not just reactive measures. The safety of thousands of women and children depends on every rand allocated to combating GBVF reaching the frontline services for which it is intended. Therefore, he strongly urges the CEO's office to initiate a formal independent investigation into these matters and make the results and corrective actions public to ensure transparency and restore public trust.
The association's president, Lídia Gulele, announced that Mozambican jurists wish to collaborate with the Assembly of the Republic in the area of human rights. She mentioned that the association has been disseminating laws approved by parliament to Mozambican communities and aims for Mozambique to be aware of these laws to foster a legal culture, allowing citizens to defend themselves in case of rights violations.
According to Lídia Gulele, the organization plans to create partnership mechanisms with parliament. The goal is to strengthen legal education in communities and support issues related to human rights, involving judges, prosecutors, lawyers, notaries, and law students.
The responsible party emphasized that a high rate of domestic violence persists in Mozambique, characterized as gender-based violence. She argued that both institutions—the association and parliament—can work together to reduce this form of violence.
Furthermore, the association expressed interest in collaborating with parliamentary committees focused on constitutional issues, human rights, and gender. The possibility of formalizing this collaboration through a memorandum of understanding was mentioned to guide future joint actions. Lídia Gulele expressed satisfaction with the reception of the request by the president of the Assembly of the Republic, declaring the association's readiness to cooperate in these areas.
The Mozambican Association of Women in Legal Careers brings together professionals from various areas of the justice system, including magistrates, prosecutors, lawyers, notaries, and law students. The entity promotes initiatives aimed at legal education, the defense of human rights, and the promotion of gender equality in Mozambique.
In a parallel context, Mozambican social activist Graça Machel criticized in Maputo on April 17th the acceptance of sexual harassment in the country and the fragility of criminal accountability, calling for stricter penalties. On April 2nd, the president of the Mozambican Association of Judges advocated in Maputo for greater dissemination of legislation against sexual harassment, warning that lack of knowledge prevents reports and hinders the fight against practices such as public harassment.
On the same day, Quitéria Guirengane, executive secretary of the NGO Observatory of Women, classified sexual harassment as a 'silent crime,' which is often difficult to prove and occurs in various social environments, such as streets, schools, and workplaces. Citing the Women's Status Barometer 2024, she reported that 89.2% of women felt safe moving around their neighborhoods during the day, but only about 20% felt safe at night, indicating a correlation between harassment and the risk of sexual violence.
Additionally, the President of Mozambique, Daniel Chapo, expressed concern on March 8th about the increase in cases of gender-based violence, considering it an obstacle to national development efforts. Finally, on March 5th, a group of one thousand Mozambican women requested the classification of femicide, the criminalization of obstetric and digital violence, the creation of specialized judicial sectors for domestic violence, rape, and harassment, as well as the guarantee of economic autonomy for courts.
