A recent Constitutional Court ruling in South Africa has been distorted online, fuelling anti-foreigner sentiment in Durban. The Scalabrini judgment, handed down on 7 July, stated that asylum seekers cannot be turned away at the door on procedural grounds before their claim is heard. However, a misrepresented version of the ruling has been circulating online, claiming it grants citizenship, jobs, and voting rights to asylum seekers. This misinformation has led to a surge in anti-foreigner mobilisation online.
An analysis of online posts by Murmur Intelligence revealed a significant increase in anti-foreigner content between 3 and 9 October. The data showed that online conversation grew almost daily, with around 4,000 relevant posts on X on 3 October, increasing to around 60,000 by 8 October. YouTube comments on relevant videos also grew from 39 to 2,440 over the same period, peaking on 8 October. The trigger for this online unrest was the Department of Home Affairs' operational directive implementing the Scalabrini judgment.
The directive, which told refugee reception offices to resume accepting new applications and not to turn people away for unlawful entry, missing documents, or reporting late, was misrepresented online. The first widely shared posts opposing the directive appeared on 3 October from Jacinta Ngobese-Zuma (@JacintaNgobese), framing it as a United Nations-imposed registration of "illegal immigrants". This misinformation was rapidly spread, with the conversation running to roughly 250,000 posts over the week.
The analysis suggests that this online unrest is a homegrown response, driven by domestic actors. The vast majority of posts were authored by South African accounts, with most of the rest being reposts of South African accounts. However, the presence of paid influencers and accounts with high buzzer scores, which repeatedly amplify the same few influencers, is prominent in the network and has contributed to the anti-foreigner movement's outsized presence online.
The misinformation surrounding the Scalabrini judgment is multifaceted, with claims that asylum seekers are being granted citizenship, having unfair access to grants and pensions, and supposedly having an impact on jobs and labour law. Claims about voting rights, particularly that asylum seekers might vote in the 4 November local elections, also emerged. A post claiming that "over 3 million" refugees and asylum seekers had applied for Sassa grants was reposted almost 5,000 times.
The anti-foreigner movement, which has been active since April 2020, appears to be continuing to amplify its agenda online. The movement's use of social media has allowed it to reach a large audience and create a sense of urgency around the issue of asylum seekers. However, the accuracy of the claims being made and the impact on public discourse remain a concern.
The online unrest highlights the challenges of misinformation in South Africa and the need for fact-based public discourse. The Scalabrini judgment, which aimed to clarify the rights of asylum seekers, has been distorted and used to fuel anti-foreigner sentiment. As the country prepares for the 4 November local elections, it remains to be seen how this misinformation will impact public opinion and policy.
Key points
- A distorted version of the Scalabrini judgment has been used to fuel anti-foreigner sentiment in South Africa.
- The online unrest was driven by domestic actors, with the majority of posts authored by South African accounts.
- The misinformation surrounding the judgment includes claims about citizenship, grants, jobs, and voting rights for asylum seekers.
