South Africans wanting to bring home people they’ve married overseas or intend to marry at home have to fork out R6 000, reports Marion Edmunds
The Department of Home Affairs is making 28-year-old Mitch Yuill pay for his love — it is costing him more than R6 000 to bring his British-born bride into the country to live with him.
South African-born Yuill, who is to be married on September 6 in the United Kingdom, says he does not have the money to pay the state-imposed “lobola”, and is threatening to take the Department of Home Affairs to court, on the grounds the fee is unconstitutional.
Yuill’s fiancee is one of thousands to be hit by the new tariffs which require all foreigners applying for South African permanent residence to pay a fee of more than R6 000 for the processing of an application.
This does not guarantee that the residence will be granted by the Immigrants’ Selection Board.
“Basically what it boils down to is that if you have money you can fall in love with and marry a foreigner. If not, tough … I cannot believe a government that portrays itself as the guardian of high principles could be so unerringly mercenary towards its own and prospective citizens,” Yuill said this week.
“It is my intention to stand up and be counted as I feel that it is of great importance to all South Africans who fall in love with non-South Africans. What right does the state have to predetermine who we can and cannot marry?”
His fiancee, Jo Clement, a journalist and publisher, has resigned from her job at the Cambridge Evening News in anticipation of settling with Yuill in South Africa.
It is likely the state would grant Yuill’s future wife permanent residence if he pays up, but he believes that the tariff undermines his rights as a South African citizen and is tantamount to financial discrimination. Unfortunately, at this stage, he does not have the money to take the matter to court, and is looking for funding to fight the challenge.
If Yuill’s fiancee comes into the country as a tourist, Yuill could be arrested for harbouring a foreigner illegally, because she would have entered the country under false pretences.
Like Yuill, the Beavon family in Johannesburg seethes about the unfair tariff. Professor Keith Beavon of the Faculty of Science at the University of the Witwatersrand is furious that his son — a qualified doctor — has to pay thousands of rands to bring his fiancee into the country.
His son, who is currently working at Baragwanath Hospital in Johannesburg, spent time working overseas where he met his fiancee. They intend to marry in September, but have been thrown off balance by the discovery that he must pay 1 050 to the Home Affairs Department to bring her into the country.
Keith Beavon says while some other countries do charge for immigration permits, it is unusual for charges to be slapped on spouses. He believes that the drafters of this law — the Aliens’ Control Amendment Act — have made a mistake.
“My God, this is a serious problem — it goes against the spirit of what the state wants to do. They are trying to prevent aliens from coming into South Africa to get jobs, but to whack this on to the spouses is not fair … It’s more than the average young professional’s take-home pay, it’s more than three bond repayments, my God, it’s not an encouragement …” he said.
Beavon said that his son had job offers from British hospitals and once he had married his fiancee, he had automatic entry into Britain and freedom to work there.
“President Mandela has just made a speech encouraging South African doctors and dentists to come back to the country and when they apply, they are going to find that they have to pay this to bring in their foreign wives or husbands. With this, it is going to be difficult for anybody to pull any ex-South Africans who have fallen in love with foreigners back into the country.”
The Department of Home Affairs had failed to comment by the time of going to press.
l Meanwhile Home Affairs has lost a landmark immigration case which should have far-reaching implications for the way in which the department handles applications by foreigners for permanent residence in South Africa.
British-born industrialist David Foulds took the Home Affairs Department to court for repeatedly rejecting his applications for permanent residence without giving him reasons why his application was being thrown out.
He is a Johannesburg-based entrepreneur with a thriving business, built on his specialist knowledge and skills in the motor industry, and a desire to commit himself to South Africa.
Foulds was one of very few people who were prepared to challenge the practice of the Immigrants’ Selection Board and the Home Affairs Department of rejecting applications without furnishing reasons for doing so.
Judge Piet Streicher set aside the board’s decision and ruled that it should re-evaluate Foulds’ application in “a lawful and procedurally fair manner”. Streicher ordered Home Affairs to pay the costs.
Foulds does not automatically get permanent residence, but can now reapply, knowing the Immigrants’ Selection Board will have to give him the opportunity to justify his application, should there be a problem. This has never happened before.
His attorney, Susan Nurick, said: “This case demonstrates that state departments such as Home Affairs must in future ensure all their decisions are premised upon fair and equitable procedures, even in circumstances where the state has an absolute discretion.
“It is hoped that the Department of Home Affairs will now implement this judgment by furnishing reasons for adverse decisions which often have far- reaching effects on individual rights.”
Foulds said this week: “I’ve been sucking lemons all day to stop myself smiling, I’m so pleased. It’s strange that President Nelson Mandela is making speeches in the UK, telling people to come here and invest and build businesses and then these guys in the Home Affairs Department are trying to throw us out.”