South Africa has begun seeking financial compensation from several African governments after spending millions of dollars returning foreign nationals to their countries amid an intensifying crackdown on undocumented migration.
The Department of Home Affairs told lawmakers that the South African government has spent almost $18 million on the recent repatriation effort. The expenditure covers transportation, temporary holding and repatriation facilities, as well as additional staff costs incurred during the operations.
Officials said formal requests for reimbursement have been sent to Malawi, Ethiopia and Nigeria, whose nationals were among those returned from South Africa.
The financial dispute comes as South Africa deals with an unprecedented increase in deportations and voluntary migrant returns following months of heightened tensions over undocumented immigration.
Tommy Makhode, director-general of the Department of Home Affairs, said the government had not anticipated the scale of the expenditure. The unexpected costs have placed additional pressure on municipalities and government agencies that participated in the repatriation operations.
Some of those institutions have reportedly asked the Home Affairs Department to reimburse them because the expenses associated with transporting and accommodating migrants were not included in their original budgets.
Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber has described the scale of the recent migrant departures as unprecedented. The government’s enforcement campaign has intensified as anti-immigration groups continue to pressure authorities to take tougher action against undocumented foreigners.
The groups have accused migrants of contributing to unemployment, crime and pressure on essential public services. South African authorities have responded by increasing immigration enforcement and targeting people who do not have legal status in the country.
The campaign has also triggered concern in other African countries, particularly where their nationals have been affected by deportations or attacks linked to anti-immigrant sentiment.
Several governments have accused South Africa of failing to adequately protect foreign nationals living in the country. Pretoria has rejected the allegations and maintained that its immigration enforcement measures are directed at violations of the law rather than specific nationalities.
The tensions have increasingly moved into diplomatic channels.
Ghana recently attempted to have concerns over the treatment of African migrants in South Africa discussed at an upcoming African Union meeting. The proposal was rejected, but the dispute has highlighted the growing sensitivity surrounding migration within Africa.
South Africa’s own figures show that 82,875 people have either been deported or voluntarily repatriated since the latest migration tensions escalated.
However, the figure is considerably lower than estimates compiled by the migrants’ countries of origin. Those governments have reported that roughly 178,000 people have returned from South Africa during the same period.
The difference appears to reflect the large number of migrants who returned voluntarily through repatriation arrangements rather than being formally deported by South African authorities.
The government has continued to expand enforcement operations alongside the repatriation programme.
Between April and July, authorities deported 16,078 foreign nationals through the Lindela Repatriation Centre. Most of those deported were citizens of neighbouring and regional countries, including Lesotho, Malawi, Tanzania, Zimbabwe and Mozambique.
South African law enforcement agencies have also announced plans for more intensive operations against undocumented immigration and related offences.
Authorities said they had arrested almost 60,000 people suspected of being in the country illegally. More than 16,000 of those arrests were made in July alone, indicating a significant escalation in enforcement activity.
The government now faces the challenge of financing an immigration campaign that has expanded well beyond routine deportation operations.
The $18 million expenditure includes the costs of moving migrants to border points and their countries of origin, operating temporary repatriation facilities and paying additional personnel required to manage the large number of people involved.
South Africa’s request for reimbursement effectively shifts part of the financial burden to the countries whose nationals are being returned. It remains uncertain whether the governments of Malawi, Ethiopia and Nigeria will agree to pay the requested costs or what criteria Pretoria will use to calculate each country’s share.
The issue could have wider implications for migration cooperation across Africa, particularly as governments increasingly confront large movements of people caused by economic hardship, insecurity, unemployment and political instability.
South Africa has for decades been one of the continent’s major destinations for migrants seeking employment. Its comparatively developed economy has attracted workers from across southern Africa and beyond, many of whom are employed in construction, agriculture, hospitality, domestic work and informal businesses.
But persistent unemployment and economic pressure have fuelled resentment towards foreign nationals in some communities.
Anti-immigration campaigners argue that undocumented migrants put additional pressure on already strained public services and compete with South Africans for jobs. Rights groups and other organisations have warned against blaming migrants for structural problems such as unemployment and crime, while raising concerns about violence and discrimination.
The latest enforcement campaign has therefore created a difficult balancing act for the South African government.
Authorities face pressure to enforce immigration laws and reduce irregular migration, while also maintaining diplomatic relationships with neighbouring countries and protecting foreign nationals from violence.
The cost of the repatriation programme adds another complication.
If the countries receiving their citizens decline to reimburse South Africa, Pretoria and local authorities may have to absorb much of the financial burden themselves. If reimbursement agreements are reached, however, the arrangement could influence how future large-scale migrant returns are financed across the continent.
For now, South African authorities are continuing deportations, arrests and immigration inspections as they seek to reduce the number of undocumented migrants in the country.
The financial requests to Malawi, Ethiopia and Nigeria demonstrate that the consequences of South Africa’s immigration crackdown are extending beyond its borders, affecting not only migrants and their families but also the diplomatic and financial relationships between African governments.