Does the right to dignity extend equally to refugees in South Africa?

Résumé 0

Refugee law scholars have lauded the human rights approach as the most appropriate for addressing issues faced by refugees. The inclusion of human rights in both the 1951 Refugee Convention and the Global Compact for Refugees is evidence thereof. However, even though many countries have enacted domestic refugee legislation, refugee experiences still suggest a gap between this human rights legislation in theory and in practice. For many refugees the human rights approach does not provide effective protection, as it neither ensures physical security nor protects refugees' dignity. In South Africa this is further exacerbated by the lack ofadministrative and judicial consistency. This article explores the connection between refugeehood and dignity by considering dignity principles established by four key philosophers - Hannah Arendt, Immanuel Kant, Jeremy Waldron and Henk Botha. Although all three philosophers emphasise the importance of human dignity and warn of the lack of dignity associated with statelessness, refugees often are still denied this right. The article explores the ways in which dignity is denied to refugees by considering a human rights approach, the lived experiences of refugees in South Africa, and the approach of the South African courts. By analysing refugeehood through these lenses, it becomes clear that current approaches are inadequate to fully support refugees. Despite ample legislation and an urban policy, refugees in South Africa remain outsiders and as such, their dignity often is denied.