Race for refugee status

I am about to make a profoundly unpopular statement — one which many of you, who have experienced the horror of crime and feel persecuted because of your race, will probably take immediate offence to. But, if you can, try to look past that.

The decision of a Canadian court to grant a white South African asylum-seeker refugee status on the grounds of his race is highly problematic.

Not only because it has set a precedent which will open the flood gates for every white South African hoping to emigrate, but also — more importantly — because it was the wrong decision.

Asylum-seeker Brandon Huntley claimed that he had been attacked by black criminals on seven occasions and that he had been called 'white dog' and 'settler'.

Now, while all South Africans — of all races — can empathise with Huntley over his ordeals and while all South Africans would prefer to live in a country not ravaged by crime, Huntley does not meet the criteria required for the granting of refugee status.

South Africa — admittedly boasting crime statistics to rival some conflict zones — is not a country at war. Furthermore, it has a Constitution which ensures the protection and equal rights of every citizen.

Ah! But those rights are not being enforced, I hear you cry. True.

The only conclusion that any reasonably intelligent being can reach is that the South African government lacks either the will or the ability to properly ensure the safety of its citizens.

But that is only one of the internationally agreed upon criteria which needs to be met in order for an asylum seeker to be granted refugee status. The others are:

Having already been attacked on seven previous occasions, Huntley's fear is, by all means, well-founded. But he does not — and this is an important point — meet the third criterion. As it stands, his motivation for asylum applies to the entire South African nation — 48 million people.

Huntley's assertion that he is the target of criminals because of his race is completely unfounded and borders on ludicrous. Who, in South Africa, has not, at some point or another been called something unpleasant on the basis of their race. Whatever that race may be. The epithets 'white dog' and 'settler' hardly suggest systematic persecution.

Furthermore, it is black people, not whites, who bear the brunt of South Africa's criminal atrocities. Cape Town, the city from which Huntley is seeking asylum, is home to the country's murder capital. And yet, contrary to what one would expect from Huntley's application for asylum, this is not the Southern Suburb's Mowbray. No, it is the exclusively 'non-white' suburb of Nyanga, where 266 people were murdered between April 2007 and March 2008. That is almost one person every single day.

If anyone in South Africa deserves asylum, they probably come from Nyanga.

Does Rebekah make a valid point? Or do you think that all South Africans should be allowed to seek asylum because of crime? Contribute to the debate by posting your comments below…

Race for refugee status Rebekah Kendal reckons Canada shouldn't have granted a white South African refugee status.

Abused or accomplice? Was Nancy Garrido an unwilling participant or a diabolical accomplice in her husband's crimes?

Visit our politics page Need the latest political news, features, interviews and profiles? Visit our dedicated page...