For Neels Heystek and his family, who have been refused asylum and leave to remain in Ireland, waiting for a deportation order is “like being on death row”.
Having arrived from South Africa in June of last year, fleeing what Mr Heystek describes as widespread “violence and evil”, they say they face a “serious threat” to their lives if they return.
Though they have yet to be served a deportation order, it appears inevitable they will be among a growing number of South Africans ordered to leave the State.
Mr Heystek believes their deportation is “due to the political climate”.
Two gardaí injured, one critical, after assault in Dublin city
Kyran Durnin case: Man with history of violence now suspect in murder investigation
The ‘Hawk Tuah girl’ went viral. You won’t believe what happened next – except, of course, you will
Pat Leahy: Smart people still insist the truth of a patent absurdity – that Gerry Adams was never in the IRA
“If we had come at another time we would have been protected by Ireland,” he says. “We have a strong case for asylum. But immigration is hot topic now and the Government needs to show they are throwing people out. That does not sit well with me.”
Figures from the Department of Justice show that up to September 20th, 105 South Africans either were ordered or volunteered to leave having been refused asylum and leave to remain (59 deportation orders and 46 voluntary returns) compared with 45 for all of last year (32 deportation orders and 13 voluntary returns).
Across all nationalities, the number of voluntary and enforced returns was 621 by September 20th – up 190 per cent on the 214 up to September 22nd, 2023.
Though South Africa is one of 15 countries designated as “safe” by the Department of Justice, Mr Heystek is adamant it is not. He points to the Department of Foreign Affairs travel advice of “a very high level of crime, including violent crime” in the country.
Formerly a travelling sales representative in Johannesburg, Mr Heystek says he was “so many times” confronted by people with “weapons”, “robberies at gunpoint” and experienced “absolute terror and trauma every day”. The final straw, three years ago, came with an attempt to kidnap his daughter in a shopping centre.
“Then we heard South Africans were getting protection in Ireland,” says Mr Heystek. “We were terrified for our lives. It is an extremely difficult decision to leave the country that is your home, but we left with four suitcases to ask Ireland, ‘Please protect us’.”
When they arrived, he says, their daughter would not leave their room due to “extreme post-traumatic stress”. A report from her counsellor, dated July 2023, said due to experiencing and witnessing “numerous violent experiences” in South Africa, she was “in a hyper vigilant survival mode” physically and psychologically.
“She showed extreme anxiety and fear even in the therapy room with her parents and was easily startled by outside noises. This child has not felt safe in a very long time and is very traumatised by her experiences living in South Africa.”
After months of counselling and support, says Mr Heystek, his daughter is thriving, playing with the local GAA club and has just started secondary school.
The family’s application, being from a “safe” country, was processed under accelerated decision-making procedures. They received a refusal for both asylum and subsidiary protection last December. They applied for a review and humanitarian leave to remain and in the past fortnight were told these had been denied.
In its report, refusing leave to remain, the International Protection Office (IPO) accepts “on the balance of probabilities” the family were “victims of crime in South Africa” but does not accept they suffered “any racially motivated crimes or that crimes against white people in South Africa are racially motivated generally”.
While noting the fears of both his wife and daughter, that they would suffer a “severe and irreversible decline in their mental health ... [and that] a significant reduction in their life expectancy” would result if forced to return to South Africa, the report says their medical situation did not “reach the threshold of a violation” of their human rights.
Having considered the humanitarian aspects of the application, the IPO case officer concluded: “The common good in maintaining the integrity of the international protection and immigration system outweigh the features of this case.”
The refusal “broke” his daughter, says Mr Heystek.
“She came in from school happy, dancing. I told her we had bad news, we had been declined again. She shouted ‘Stop, stop, stop, stop’, tears streaming down her eyes. She said, ‘But it’s not safe there. I can’t go back. What about my school? My friends?’ She went outside and cried and cried.”
He adds: “I want to say, every single Irish person we have met since we have come here has been good, kind, overwhelmingly supportive. Thank God for that experience. But now, to suit a political agenda, we feel like we are on death row waiting for the deportation notice.”
A spokesman for the Department of Justice said a country may only be designated safe “where we are satisfied that ... it can be shown that there is generally and consistently no persecution, torture or inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment, and no threat by reason of indiscriminate violence in situations of international or internal armed conflict.
[ Analysis: How does Ireland decide what countries are ‘safe’ for asylum seekers?Opens in new window ]
“The department is taking all necessary steps to manage the international protection process fairly, efficiently, and effectively, while ensuring the integrity of Ireland’s rules-based immigration system is maintained.”
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
