DEFENDING DEMOCRACY IN EXILE Policy Responses to Transnational Repression Introduction O n January 1, 2014, Patrick Karegeya was found dead in his hotel room. A former ally of Rwandan president Paul Kagame and head of Rwandan intelligence, Karegeya fled Rwanda to South Africa in 2007, where he co-founded the opposition Rwanda National Congress (RNC). Though Karegeya’s family and allies immediately suspected that he had been assassinated by the Rwandan government, it was not until 2019 that South Africa opened the inquest into Karegeya’s murder that eventually led to arrest warrants being issued for two government-linked Rwandan individuals.1 Authorities largely appear to lack the political will or capacity to address the problem comprehensively. With strong constitutional protections for human rights and a reputation as a leader on democracy and human rights in the region, South Africa is an appealing destination for those seeking refuge.2 It draws a sizable number of refugees from the African continent, notably from Somalia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Ethiopia.3 Despite its role as a regional human rights leader, South Africa fails to offer adequate protections. Karegeya’s assassination is still the most highprofile instance of transnational repression in South Africa to date and Rwanda exiles remain at risk, but people of other nationalities may be targeted as well. In 2021, secret recordings revealed plans by officials from the government of Swaziland to assassinate Zweli Martin Dlamini, a Swazi journalist living in exile in South Africa. While the South African government demonstrates a degree of awareness about transnational repression, particularly in the Rwandan case, authorities largely appear to lack the political will or capacity to address the problem comprehensively. The South African security response to transnational repression is hampered by structural gaps and underlying problems with police conduct and community relations, as well as competing foreign policy considerations. Asylum seekers and refugees face a complex bureaucracy that may take years to navigate, and a recent update to refugee law restricts diaspora activism. Additionally, xenophobia directed towards refugees and migrants is entrenched in security and migration practices, rendering both spheres of government less helpful to potential victims of extraterritorial targeting. Politicians often use foreigners as scapegoats for South Africa’s socioeconomic problems and promigrant policies are politically unpopular. Foreign nationals have been denied access to and systematically intimidated in hospitals, schools, and employment.4 2019 saw a notable wave of xenophobic violence, which left thousands displaced and over a dozen dead.5 Law enforcement has typically not held perpetrators of xenophobic violence accountable6 and the March 2019 National Action Plan to combat xenophobia has had little impact.7 The baseline lack of security and inability to rely on government protection in a xenophobic environment creates a hospitable environment for transnational repression. Suggested citation: Yana Gorokhovskaia and Isabel Linzer, “Case Study: South Africa,” in Defending Democracy in Exile: Policy Responses to Transnational Repression (Washington, DC: Freedom House, June 2022), https://freedomhouse.org/report/transnational-repression/south-africa. 2 @FreedomHouse #TransnationalRepression