The Court recognised the SAHRC’s pivotal role as a constitutional body mandated to promote, protect, and monitor human rights. Although cited as the thirteenth respondent, the SAHRC asked to present evidence and submissions supporting a rights-based interpretation of section 41 of the Immigration Act. Section 41 of the Immigration Act states that when so requested by an immigration officer or a police member, any person shall identify himself or herself as a citizen, permanent resident or foreigner, and if such person is a foreigner, he or she shall on demand produce an ascertainable valid passport and visa, or permit, and the other required documents referred to in this Act.

If such person fails to produce the required documents immediately, he or she may be detained by an immigration officer or a police member for a period not exceeding 48 hours, or for such longer period as may be reasonably necessary and justifiable, in order to verify his or her identity or status, and if it is established that such person is an illegal foreigner, he or she may be dealt with in accordance with this Act. No person may be refused entry, removed or deported unless such person has been properly identified as an illegal foreigner, and all verification and other relevant procedures have been followed. Any detention under this section shall be in compliance with the Constitution and with this Act and shall not be for longer than the time strictly necessary to verify the person's identity or status.

The SAHRC advanced the principle that the enforcement of immigration laws must comply with constitutional guarantees and international human rights obligations, particularly the rights to dignity, privacy, freedom, and the best interests of the child.  The SAHRC submitted evidence before the Court of a fifteen-year-old South African child who was arrested in Johannesburg and detained with adults, by SAPS, after she failed to produce identity documents. This experience, initially brought to the Commission as a complaint, highlighted the challenges with the broad discretion exercised by SAPS. The Court agreed in part, declaring that section 41,authorises warrantless searches only in public places, not in private homes, workplaces, schools, or other private premises; requires that an immigration or police officer must hold a reasonable suspicion that a person is unlawfully in the country before demanding identification; and must be interpreted to protect the rights and best interests of children, in accordance with section 28 of the Constitution. These interpretive declarations effectively read constitutional safeguards into section 41, narrowing its scope and limiting potential misuse.

The Court also ordered that Operation Dudula, Zandile Dabula and its office bearers must stop demanding that any private person produce her / his passport or other identity documents to demonstrate her / his right to be in the Republic, and to stop intimidating, harassing and/or assaulting any individuals that they identify as being non-nationals. Operation Dudula was further interdicted from making public statements that constitute hate speech on the grounds of nationality, social origin or ethnicity at public gatherings, on social media platforms or in any other way. Operation Dudula was interdicted from interfering with the access of non-nationals to health care services, interfering with access to schools and intimidating or harassing learners, teachers or parents at schools.

Operation Dudula was also ordered to stop the unlawfully evicting non-nationals from their homes; unlawfully removing foreign nationals from their trading stalls or interfering with the employment of foreign nationals in shops and businesses. The South African Government has been ordered to take reasonable steps to implement the National Action Plan to Combat Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance. The Commission hopes this judgment will put a stop on the continual intimidation and harassment of non-nationals and undocumented persons by Operation Dudula and other related groups. The Commission once again call on the state authorities to do their work of restoring law and order and ensuring constitutional rights are upheld.

As earlier as 02 July 2025, the Commission has publicly emphasised that the actions of these vigilante groups are unlawful, violate constitutional rights and undermine the rule of law. The Commission will monitor the implementation of this judgment and look forward to the enrolment of its case in High Court in Durban against these vigilante groups and its leaders.

END

ISSUED BY THE SOUTH AFRICAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION