Durban Refugees Split Over Lindela Relocation Plans

For the past four months, over three hundred refugees and asylum seekers have made a makeshift camp on a pavement outside Durban’s Home Affairs office. Their presence is a direct response to a wave of xenophobic attacks that left many foreign nationals without safe accommodation. Now, a provincial government proposal to relocate the group to the Lindela Repatriation Centre in Krugersdorp has sparked a sharp division within the camp.

Why the Camp Was Established

In May, a series of violent incidents targeting foreign nationals prompted the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and local NGOs to urge the South African government to provide emergency shelter. With no formal refugee camps allowed under South African law—court rulings have repeatedly held that the Constitution does not permit the establishment of permanent refugee settlements—the displaced people set up a temporary encampment directly outside the Home Affairs building, hoping the department would intervene.

The Lindela Proposal and Its Controversy

The KwaZulu‑Natal Home Affairs office has offered two options: move to Lindela Repatriation Centre, a facility traditionally used for processing voluntary and forced returns, or return to the surrounding communities where many had previously been evicted. The provincial spokesperson, Cyril Mncwabe, said the logistics are still being finalised, but the decision has already forced refugees to choose between uncertain freedom and guaranteed shelter.

Princess Adjei, a self‑appointed spokesperson for the camp, argued that staying on the streets indefinitely is unsustainable. “South Africa’s laws do not allow refugee camps, so we must either integrate into communities or accept government‑provided accommodation,” she said. Adjei believes Lindela will at least offer food, shelter and basic medical care, even if it limits movement.

Conversely, many refugees view Lindela as a gateway to deportation. Kafuti Muyumba, a Congolese national who fled civil war after losing both parents, insists that his legal status—he holds a valid asylum permit—should protect him from being sent to a repatriation centre. “Lindela is known as a place where people are prepared for removal. We have asked the government for temporary shelter, not for a venue that could end our stay in South Africa,” he explained.

Legal and Human‑Rights Dimensions

South Africa’s asylum framework is governed by the Refugees Act of 1998, which obliges the state to provide “adequate shelter” to asylum seekers while their applications are processed. However, the country has struggled to meet this duty, with the Department of Home Affairs reporting a backlog of over 200,000 pending cases. The Constitution guarantees the right to human dignity, yet repeated court rulings—most notably the 2019 Constitutional Court judgment in Minister of Home Affairs v. Mthembu—have affirmed that the state cannot establish permanent refugee camps, forcing reliance on community‑based solutions.

Lindela Repatriation Centre, located in Gauteng, has a controversial reputation. Established in the early 1990s, it originally functioned as a detention facility for undocumented migrants. Over the years, reports from Amnesty International and the South African Human Rights Commission have highlighted overcrowding, inadequate sanitation, and instances of abuse. While the centre now claims to operate under a “voluntary return” model, many asylum seekers remain wary of any facility associated with forced removals.

Community Tensions and Recent Violence

The camp’s existence has not been without friction. In early March, the March and March movement—a local civil‑society coalition that campaigns against xenophobia—held a demonstration near the Home Affairs office. The protest turned violent when some participants clashed with camp residents, resulting in five injuries and two arrests for public violence. The incident underscored the fragile relationship between the refugees and segments of the local population, who often view the presence of asylum seekers as a strain on municipal resources.

Mayor Zandile Gumede of Durban has visited the site twice, urging the refugees to consider returning to their neighbourhoods. While the mayor’s office has pledged to assist with temporary housing, budgetary constraints and the sheer scale of the displacement have limited concrete outcomes.

What Lies Ahead for the Durban Refugees

The provincial government has not set a definitive date for the relocation, leaving camp residents in limbo. Some, like Princess Adjei, are preparing to board transport to Lindela, hoping the provision of meals and a roof over their heads will outweigh the loss of mobility. Others, such as Kafuti Muyumba, plan to remain in Durban, seeking legal avenues to secure community‑based accommodation that respects their right to stay.

Human‑rights organisations, including the Legal Resources Centre and the International Refugee Rights Initiative, have called on the Department of Home Affairs to honour its constitutional obligations by offering adequate, dignified shelter without resorting to repatriation centres. They argue that a sustainable solution must involve coordinated housing programmes, access to legal aid, and community integration initiatives.

As the stalemate continues, the plight of the Durban refugees highlights broader challenges in South Africa’s asylum system: balancing legal restrictions on refugee camps, addressing xenophobic sentiment, and ensuring that vulnerable newcomers receive the protection guaranteed by both national law and international conventions.