International migration, xenophobia and the South African state

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: This dissertation seeks to advance the political understanding of xenophobia in South Africa byexamining the relationship between the South African state and its African migrant population. Itinvestigates the practices of frontline officials of three state institutions when dealing with Africanmigrants and relates such practices to the prevalence of xenophobia. These institutions are theDepartment of Home Affairs, the South African Police Service and the City of Cape Town.The state of exception, propounded by Giorgio Agamben, provides a conceptual lens through which toexamine the practices of state officials towards African migrants and the place of migrants in SouthAfrican society. This concept is concerned with the law and the conditions of its application orsuspension. It is characterised by the relationship between sovereign power and 'bare life'– the formof deprived subjectivity produced by and captured in the exercise of sovereign power. The research is guided by a central question: Do the practices of state officials (from the threeinstitutions), as experienced by African migrants, reinforce xenophobia in South Africa? This questionis addressed by way of four secondary questions: a) How are the practices of state officialsexperienced by migrants?; b) To what extent are migrants treated differently by state officials in termsof their legal status or nationality?; c) Is the approach of state officials towards migrants evidence of astate of exception?; and, d) If so, to what extent has a state of exception in dealing with migrantsshaped xenophobia in South Africa?In order to answer the research questions, an ethnographic field study was undertaken in Cape Town.The data-collection instruments were semi-structured interviews and observation at selected HomeAffairs offices. A total of 40 African migrants, seven key informants from organisations that work onmigration issues and two state officials were interviewed. The migrant sample represented 13 Africancountries and comprised five legal migrant categories. The key findings are that, firstly, migrants' experiences with state officials were predominantlynegative. Secondly, the primary basis for differential treatment of migrants was their foreignness,regardless of their nationality. With regard to the police and municipal officials, migrants' experienceswere further differentiated by other variables such as residential area, socio-economic status, andknowledge of the law or access to human rights organisations. There were also apparent differences inhow migrants experienced Home Affairs officials based on their legal status with asylum seekers andrefugees experiencing worse treatment than temporary and permanent residents. Thirdly, evidence ofthe state of exception varied within the three institutions. The main agents of the state of exceptionwere mainly Home Affairs officials followed by the police. In the case of Home Affairs officials, thetargets were predominantly illegal foreigners, asylum seekers and refugees, and in the case of thepolice migrants who are informal traders were targeted. The most evident site for the practice of the exception was the Refugee Reception Office. Fourthly, both the state of exception and xenophobiahave an exclusionary power, which makes them mutually reinforcing.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University