The South African Constitutional Court ruled Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) holders have a right to fair administrative action.
The ruling officially dismissed Home Affairs Minister Aaron Motsoaledi’s attempt to appeal the 2023 High Court judgment that was found in their favour.
The challenge was initiated on the grounds that the minister Motsoaledi’s decision was unlawful, invalid, and unconstitutional, impacting approximately 178,000 Zimbabwean nationals currently holding ZEPs.
On June 28, 2023, the Pretoria High Court ruled in favour of the applicants, finding that the decision was procedurally unfair and infringed on the constitutional rights of ZEP holders. The court highlighted that the Minister’s failure to conduct a fair ‘notice and comment’ process rendered the decision uninformed and procedurally irrational.
The High Court’s decision was set aside and remitted back to the minister to conduct a fair process that considers the views and interests of ZEP holders and the broader society.
Despite the Minister’s attempts to appeal the High Court’s decision, including applications to the High Court and the Supreme Court of Appeal, the Constitutional Court dismissed the Minister’s application for special leave to appeal on 18 June 2024.
The Constitutional Court found that the application had no reasonable prospects of success. Norton Rose Fulbright South Africa’s Impact Litigation directors Jason Whyte and Laura Macfarlane, under the firm’s social impact team, represented Cormsa in the matter, with Advocate David Simonsz providing assistance.
This ruling came after the Helen Suzman Foundation in collaboration with a Capetown based Zimbabwean prominent lawyer Advocate Talent Rusere and the Consortium for Refugees and Migrants in South Africa (Cormsa) challenged the Minister of Home Affairs’ decision to terminate the ZEP under the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (PAJA)
