So I went to Home Affairs in downtown Jo'burg today to straighten out my visa situation (which looks like it'll be OK) and it was surprisingly painless. I don't know if I jumped the queue or something, but I just walked up to one of the windows without waiting at all and the lady helped me out.
Anyway, what was more interesting about the field trip was what I saw taped to the wall behind the glass of the window of the lady that was helping me. As she took my passport and disappeared to do some inspecting, I was left at the counter to wait and I read the response to a request for asylum from a woman from the Democratic Republic of Congo, which was for some unknown reason taped to the wall just on the other side of the glass. It went like this:
"... On 2005/06/28 you lodged your applications [sic] for asylum. Your application has been rejected as unfounded.
YOUR CLAIM:
You claim that you left your country because of war."
It then cited the relevant policies that defined how one could gain asylum.
I wonder what happened to this woman. What happens if war "officially" stops but the ground-level reality is much different? What happens if you want to leave before fighting starts again? I'd like to think that someone from Home Affairs went out to find this woman, chased her down, caught up to her and said, while gasping, "Shit, geez, we're really sorry, you can come in now. We had know idea that you meant war was about to happen. Our bad, really. Hah, you know you should buy a lottery ticket or something, hey? OK, well, now come have some soup."
I'm pretty sure that didn't happen
And I wonder why this was posted in the Home Affairs office for employees. Is it to remind them that sometimes they have to be ruthless, and that they should be prepared for this? Or could it be to say that sometimes they make mistakes?
Anyway, I thought it interesting enough to jot down on my little pad.
Go here for some basic DRC updates.
And here for a Times article sent my way by Agatha a little while back. Disclaimer: This is not a pleasant read.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
god, what a horrific article. but the use of the words "epidemic" and "metastasize" seems kind of problematic--it seems to suggest the problem is an external entity outside the agency of anyone involved, which kind of absolves the people responsible, no? maybe it's just me.
refugee policies are kind of fucked--i know canada's are, and sa is probably even more messed up because of the sheer number of asylum-seekers.
Post a Comment