A South African court has imposed strict conditions on anti-migrant protests following concerns over violence and public safety, just days before the country’s local elections.
Judge Peter Olsen ruled that the March and March movement could continue its planned demonstrations. However, protesters must follow new restrictions intended to prevent further unrest.
The decision comes as tensions over immigration intensify ahead of South Africa’s November 4 local elections.
According to Africanews, citing AFP reporting, the court imposed the restrictions after police warned that demonstrations could threaten public order and the safety of foreign nationals.
South African court sets conditions for anti-migrant protests
Under the court’s ruling, the March and March movement may demonstrate only between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Participants are prohibited from carrying weapons or covering their faces.
The court also banned protesters from damaging property or setting buildings on fire.
The restrictions followed an application by acting Police Minister Firoz Cachalia, who initially sought to stop the demonstrations.
Cachalia argued that the protests posed serious risks to public safety.
However, the court allowed the movement to exercise its right to demonstrate under tighter conditions.
The case is expected to return to court in 2027.
Police warn of violence in Durban
Authorities raised concerns about escalating tensions in Durban, where anti-migrant demonstrations have taken place.
Police intelligence reportedly identified an alleged plan to set fire to the Home Affairs Refugee Reception Centre in Berea.
The facility provides documentation services to asylum seekers.
During Friday’s hearing, lawyers representing the police described a deteriorating security situation.
They said more than 400 police officers had been deployed to respond to the unrest.
However, authorities argued that existing policing measures had failed to contain the violence.
Police also linked some tensions to misinformation surrounding a July Constitutional Court ruling.
That decision established that asylum seekers cannot be denied access to South Africa’s asylum system solely because of procedural requirements.
Protest movement defends right to demonstrate
The March and March movement rejected attempts to stop its demonstrations.
Its representatives argued that peaceful protest is protected under South Africa’s constitution.
The organisation also distanced itself from violent incidents, saying it should not be held responsible for the actions of individuals involved in unrest.
Speaking before the ruling, the movement’s legal representative, Xolani Zuma, accused authorities of attempting to silence protesters.
The movement has raised concerns about undocumented immigration and its alleged effects on employment, crime and public services.
However, claims linking migrants broadly to criminal activity should not be treated as established facts.
The court’s decision seeks to balance the constitutional right to protest with the protection of public safety.
Anti-migrant violence raises concerns
The legal dispute comes amid growing concerns about violence targeting foreign nationals in South Africa.
According to police figures cited in the report, at least five foreign nationals have been killed in anti-migrant violence this year.
Some African governments have reported higher figures.
Police said the nationality of a person killed in a recent incident was still being investigated.
The violence has raised concerns about the safety of migrant communities and the risk of further unrest.
South Africa has experienced recurring tensions over immigration, particularly during periods of economic pressure and political competition.
Immigration tensions ahead of South Africa elections
The court ruling comes just days before South Africans vote in local elections on November 4.
Immigration has become an increasingly prominent political issue, alongside unemployment, crime and access to public services.
Some political movements accuse migrants of placing additional pressure on employment opportunities and government resources.
However, these claims remain politically contested.
Meanwhile, police resources are already under pressure as authorities prepare to secure the upcoming elections.
Lawyers warned that further unrest could place additional demands on security forces.
The court’s restrictions will allow demonstrations to continue while giving authorities greater powers to enforce public safety conditions.
For now, the ruling highlights the challenge facing South Africa as it seeks to protect constitutional freedoms while preventing violence against foreign nationals.