South Africa’s debate over undocumented immigration has intensified, with the movement March and March leading protests to demand action from regional governments. On 17 August 2026, the group marched through Durban during a Southern African Development Community (SADC) summit, carrying the theme “It’s time to fetch your people.” They urged SADC nations to repatriate their citizens living in South Africa without legal documentation and set a new deadline of 30 September 2026 for undocumented foreign nationals to leave the country.
The September deadline follows an earlier one set for 30 June 2026, when March and March and other civic organizations mobilized supporters nationwide. The Durban march emphasized accountability, directing calls for deportation not only at the South African government but also at neighboring states. The movement argues that South Africa bears a burden exacerbated by irregular migration amid high unemployment, strained public services, and housing shortages.
Legal Framework and Constitutional Changes
One haematologist treating patients in the region noted the strain on local resources, reflecting broader concerns about immigration’s impact on social services. However, legal experts highlight that South Africa’s immigration system, governed by the Immigration Act 13 of 2002, provides mechanisms for addressing unlawful presence. Section 34 of the Act outlines procedures for deportation and detention, including legal challenges for affected individuals. Yet, the Constitutional Court previously ruled parts of this section unconstitutional due to insufficient judicial oversight, prompting Parliament to pass the Immigration Amendment Act 11 of 2025.
The amendment, signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa on 11 May 2026, mandates court oversight within 48 hours and introduces an “interests of justice” test for continued detention. However, the Act will come into operation on a date determined by the President. Legal scholars explain that while foreign nationals without valid permits face removal, they retain constitutional rights. Section 7 of the Constitution protects “people,” not just citizens, ensuring rights to dignity, equality, and fair treatment during detention.
Municipal Workers and Illegal Electricity
Reports of municipal workers allegedly involved in illegal electricity connections in informal settlements have raised questions about accountability. The government has stressed that illegal conduct should be addressed regardless of nationality, noting that Section 49(3) of the Immigration Act criminalizes knowingly employing undocumented foreigners.
While March and March defends its right to protest under constitutional freedoms of assembly, it cautioned that such movements do not replace state authority. Critics have raised concerns about potential xenophobia, but organizers maintain their focus is on enforcing laws, not targeting individuals based on nationality. The upcoming 30 September deadline looms as a critical test of South Africa’s capacity to balance legal obligations, resource constraints, and social stability.
Constitutional Protections for All Persons
Constitutional protections extend to all persons within South Africa’s borders, regardless of immigration status. Section 7 of the Constitution affirms that the Bill of Rights applies to “everyone,” ensuring rights to dignity and equal protection. Section 35 further guarantees that arrested or detained individuals must be informed of the reason for their detention, have access to legal representation, and be brought before a court within prescribed timeframes. These rights apply equally to undocumented foreign nationals facing removal proceedings.
Enforcement of immigration laws must therefore proceed in accordance with both statutory provisions and constitutional obligations. The government has emphasized that targeting undocumented individuals is not equivalent to xenophobia, provided that actions are lawful and non-discriminatory. Section 49(3) of the Immigration Act criminalizes the knowing employment of undocumented foreigners, placing accountability on employers who circumvent legal immigration processes. This reflects a broader principle: immigration enforcement must address not only those without valid status but also those who facilitate unlawful entry or residence.
