Irankunda and Another v Director of Asylum Seeker Management: Department of Home Affairs and Others (with Scalabrini Centre of Cape Town intervening as Amicus Curiae)

The appellants are Burundian nationals whose initial asylum applications in South Africa were unsuccessful and finally rejected by the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs. They later sought to submit further asylum applications on the basis of new circumstances allegedly arising after their initial applications, constituting sur place refugee claims. The Director of Asylum Seeker Management and the Cape Town Refugee Reception Office refused to accept the subsequent applications, insisting that the appellants must first return to Burundi. The appellants approached the Western Cape High Court to compel the Department of Home Affairs to accept and determine their further applications. The High Court dismissed the application, prompting an appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs. Paragraphs (iv) and (v) of the High Court order were set aside and replaced with an order directing the first and second respondents to accept the appellants’ sur place asylum applications within five working days and to determine them within 21 working days, and to pay the costs of the application jointly and severally.

This is the first Supreme Court of Appeal decision to directly address refugee sur place claims in South African law. It clarifies that asylum seekers may submit subsequent applications based on new circumstances and affirms that South Africa’s refugee system must comply with the principle of non-refoulement. The judgment strengthens the protection of refugees by aligning domestic practice with international refugee law and provides authoritative guidance to the Department of Home Affairs on handling repeat and sur place asylum claims.