- South Africa’s Refugee Appeals Authority faces one hundred sixty thousand cases in a massive backlog.
- A staffing increase in Gauteng successfully cleared local appeals after lawyers grew from ten to forty.
- Funding cuts reduced the national adjudication panel from thirty-six members to just nine in twenty twenty-six.
South Africa’s Refugee Appeals Authority faced more than 160,000 asylum-seeker appeals as officials briefed Parliament on August 18, 2026. The queue remains extensive.
The authority and the Standing Committee for Refugee Affairs addressed the Home Affairs Committee about delayed asylum decisions and suspected fraudulent applications. Forged documents and inaccurate information formed part of the discussion.
Home Affairs Minister Leon Schreiber said Gauteng’s appeals backlog had been cleared after staffing increased from 10 personnel to 40 lawyers. The department plans to add another 35 lawyers in the Western Cape.
That result has not ended the wider delays. Asylum seekers can wait five to 10 years or longer for decisions, while 2026 funding cuts reduced the adjudication panel from 36 members to nine.
A July 22 update placed more than 120,000 cases under consideration. It also said the queue had fallen by more than 12% after the Gauteng and Cape Bars worked with UNHCR and the department.
The figures describe different points in the system. Gauteng’s reported local clearance sits alongside a broader appeals pipeline that still contains more than 120,000 cases.
Gauteng’s staffing increase has not matched the wider capacity loss
The staffing expansion changed the number of lawyers assigned in Gauteng. It did not reverse the reduction in the overall adjudication panel reported during 2026.
| Measure | Reported figure or change |
|---|---|
| Gauteng staffing | Increased from 10 personnel to 40 lawyers |
| Western Cape plan | 35 additional lawyers |
| Adjudication panel in 2026 | Fell from 36 members to nine |
| Reported backlog reduction | More than 12% |
| 2019 clearance estimate | 68 years |
A 2019 audit estimated that clearing the appeals backlog at that time would take 68 years. Applicants still face waits measured in years.
The department has begun digitising refugee appeals. That effort is accompanied by cooperation with the provincial Bars and UNHCR, but the reported panel reduction shows how staffing and funding constraints can affect the pace of decisions.
Fraud reviews also add work. Officials have linked the appeals backlog to forged documents and incorrect information submitted in cases.
Appeals delays affect status, work and movement
Pending appeals can leave asylum seekers waiting for a final refugee-status outcome. The delay may affect their ability to work, study, move freely and access assistance.
The framework comes from the Refugees Act 130 of 1998 and its regulations. Appeals move through the authority and related structures within the Department of Home Affairs.
Two 2026 court rulings provide additional legal context. One Constitutional Court decision was reported as finding that rejected asylum seekers do not necessarily have a right to apply again as refugees after exhausting their appeals.
A later 2026 ruling addressed a different procedural issue. It said that failing to obtain a section 22 permit within five days of entry is not automatically disqualifying.
The rulings do not remove the practical effect of a prolonged queue. A pending case can remain unresolved while the agency examines eligibility, documentation and procedural questions.
Digitisation now sits alongside a reduced panel
The department’s 2026 staffing expansion and digitisation programme are intended to improve processing capacity, while underfunding remains a risk to faster finalisation. Gauteng’s reported result offers one measure of what additional personnel can deliver locally.
The broader system still faces the figures presented to Parliament on August 18. Its ability to reduce the queue will depend on how quickly cases move through review and adjudication.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.
