IIN CONVERSATION WITH MMEMME MOGOTSI [DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
Loading player...
The Border Management Authority (BMA) has confirmed that 295 Ghanaian
nationals were successfully repatriated from South Africa to Ghana through OR
Tambo International Airport on Tuesday, 27 May 2026, in one of the latest large-
scale immigration processing operations carried out in the country.
According to the BMA, most of those processed were found to be undocumented
or had overstayed their visas and permits — in some cases for more than a year
— leading to them being declared “undesirable persons” under Section 30 of the
Immigration Act.
09:15
The operation was coordinated alongside the Ghanaian government and its High
Commission in Pretoria, which arranged a chartered aircraft and issued
Emergency Travel Certificates to many individuals who lacked valid travel
documentation.
While the deportation itself has drawn attention, the bigger national conversation
now focuses on what happens next:
Will operations like these meaningfully address undocumented migration, or do
they expose deeper systemic challenges within South Africa’s immigration and
border management systems?
The deportation comes amid heightened political and public debate around
illegal immigration, border security, asylum processes, undocumented migration,
and law enforcement capacity.
Recent years have seen growing frustration from communities over crime,
pressure on public services, hijacked buildings, unemployment, and perceptions
that immigration laws are not being consistently enforced.
At the same time, legal experts and human rights groups continue warning that
immigration enforcement must remain lawful, constitutional, and aligned with
international obligations regarding refugees, asylum seekers, and vulnerable
persons.
Importantly, the BMA’s handling of the five passengers denied departure also
highlighted the legal complexity of immigration enforcement:
One individual held a valid asylum seeker permit and could not legally be
repatriated without cancelling their protection application, while another case
involving minors raised child protection and documentation concerns.
nationals were successfully repatriated from South Africa to Ghana through OR
Tambo International Airport on Tuesday, 27 May 2026, in one of the latest large-
scale immigration processing operations carried out in the country.
According to the BMA, most of those processed were found to be undocumented
or had overstayed their visas and permits — in some cases for more than a year
— leading to them being declared “undesirable persons” under Section 30 of the
Immigration Act.
09:15
The operation was coordinated alongside the Ghanaian government and its High
Commission in Pretoria, which arranged a chartered aircraft and issued
Emergency Travel Certificates to many individuals who lacked valid travel
documentation.
While the deportation itself has drawn attention, the bigger national conversation
now focuses on what happens next:
Will operations like these meaningfully address undocumented migration, or do
they expose deeper systemic challenges within South Africa’s immigration and
border management systems?
The deportation comes amid heightened political and public debate around
illegal immigration, border security, asylum processes, undocumented migration,
and law enforcement capacity.
Recent years have seen growing frustration from communities over crime,
pressure on public services, hijacked buildings, unemployment, and perceptions
that immigration laws are not being consistently enforced.
At the same time, legal experts and human rights groups continue warning that
immigration enforcement must remain lawful, constitutional, and aligned with
international obligations regarding refugees, asylum seekers, and vulnerable
persons.
Importantly, the BMA’s handling of the five passengers denied departure also
highlighted the legal complexity of immigration enforcement:
One individual held a valid asylum seeker permit and could not legally be
repatriated without cancelling their protection application, while another case
involving minors raised child protection and documentation concerns.
