President Cyril Ramaphosa has announced a series of measures aimed at addressing growing public concerns over illegal immigration and border security as tensions around undocumented migrants continue to rise across South Africa.

The president addressed the nation on Sunday following weeks of anti-immigrant protests and increasing pressure on government to act against undocumented foreign nationals living in the country. Demonstrations have been reported in several provinces, including Gauteng, KwaZulu-Natal and the Western Cape, with some communities demanding stricter immigration enforcement.

One of the groups at the centre of the protests is March and March, an anti-migrant movement that has been organising demonstrations and calling for undocumented migrants to leave South Africa by June 30. The group’s campaign has sparked fear among some foreign nationals, with reports indicating that several migrants have already left certain communities due to concerns over possible violence and planned shutdown actions at the end of the month.

In his address, Ramaphosa acknowledged that many South Africans feel frustrated about immigration, unemployment and crime, saying government could not ignore the concerns being raised by citizens.

“South Africans are asking difficult but legitimate questions,” the president said. “They are concerned about safety, security and the rule of law. These concerns are real, and they deserve to be addressed.”

Ramaphosa stressed that South Africa remains a constitutional democracy governed by law and warned against vigilante actions targeting foreign nationals. He said only authorised law enforcement and immigration officials have the legal authority to deal with immigration violations.

“No individual or group has the right to stop people on the streets, demand identification documents or threaten foreign nationals,” he said. “Such actions undermine the rule of law and threaten social stability.”

The president outlined five key interventions government will implement to strengthen immigration management and improve border control.

The first measure involves intensifying operations against undocumented migrants and criminal syndicates linked to human trafficking, illegal border crossings and fraudulent documentation. Authorities will also increase collaboration between police, immigration officials and intelligence agencies to combat organised crime connected to illegal migration.

Secondly, government plans to strengthen border management systems to reduce illegal entry into the country. Ramaphosa said the Border Management Authority would receive additional support and resources to improve surveillance and monitoring at ports of entry.

The third intervention focuses on improving the efficiency of the immigration system, including visa processing, asylum applications and deportation procedures. Government has faced criticism in recent years over delays and backlogs within the Department of Home Affairs, with some cases taking years to process.

The fourth measure includes cracking down on corruption involving immigration officials and syndicates accused of selling fraudulent permits and identity documents. Ramaphosa said corruption within the system weakens national security and damages public trust in government institutions.

The fifth intervention involves working with communities and civil society organisations to prevent violence and xenophobic attacks while promoting lawful solutions to immigration challenges.

Ramaphosa also urged South Africans not to blame all foreign nationals for the country’s economic and social difficulties. He said many migrants contribute positively to the economy and society through business activities, labour and skills development.

South Africa has long struggled with high unemployment, poverty and crime, factors that have fuelled tensions between local communities and foreign nationals. Competition for jobs and access to public services has often intensified frustrations, particularly in poorer communities.

Political parties and civil society groups remain divided on how government should respond. Some organisations have called for tougher border controls and stricter immigration laws, while others warned against xenophobia and collective punishment of migrants.

Human rights groups have also expressed concern over inflammatory rhetoric during recent protests, warning that anti-migrant campaigns could escalate into violence similar to previous xenophobic attacks witnessed in the country over the years.

Ramaphosa appealed for calm and unity, saying government would continue enforcing the law while protecting the rights and dignity of everyone living in South Africa.

“We must resolve these challenges through lawful means,” he said. “We cannot allow fear, anger or frustration to divide our communities or lead to violence.”

Controversial commentator and social media personality Ngizwe Mchunu has publicly withdrawn a series of damaging allegations made against Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema, issuing an unconditional apology following court intervention.

The apology comes after two court rulings delivered in May 2026 ordered Mchunu to account for remarks that were found to be defamatory and harmful to Malema’s reputation.

In a public statement released on Thursday, Mchunu said he had consulted with his legal team and now understood the seriousness and legal consequences of his comments. He acknowledged the court directives and formally apologised to Malema, adding that he would not repeat similar accusations going forward.

The withdrawn remarks included allegations that Malema had allegedly received millions from undocumented foreign nationals and drug traffickers in exchange for political protection. Mchunu also retracted claims linking the EFF president to the looting of VBS Mutual Bank and the misuse of public funds connected to Ekurhuleni projects and On Point Engineering.

Apart from the corruption allegations, Mchunu had also made several insulting personal remarks aimed at Malema. In previous public appearances and interviews, he referred to the politician using derogatory terms and made inflammatory comments challenging him to confront him in Nkandla.

One of the incidents referenced in court papers related to an interview conducted in Johannesburg on April 30, where Mchunu intensified his attacks on the opposition leader. During the interview, he described Malema in disparaging language and claimed the EFF leader belonged behind bars.

He further accused Malema of benefiting from corrupt dealings involving VBS and On Point Engineering while alleging that the politician was financially supported by undocumented foreign nationals.

The North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria ruled that the statements amounted to defamation and issued an order prohibiting Mchunu from repeating the allegations in any form, whether directly or indirectly.

As part of his compliance with the court orders, Mchunu formally retracted all statements made before and after the legal proceedings and appealed to his supporters and members of the public to respect his decision to apologise.

The matter has once again drawn public attention to the growing number of defamation disputes involving political figures and online personalities in South Africa, particularly as political rhetoric increasingly spills onto social media platforms and public broadcasts.

Malema and the EFF have not yet publicly commented on Mchunu’s latest apology and retraction.

Parliament’s ongoing efforts to establish rules for the Section 89 impeachment inquiry into President Cyril Ramaphosa descended into heated exchanges on Wednesday evening, with political parties sharply divided over how the process should move forward following the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the Phala Phala matter.

Tensions emerged during a meeting of Parliament’s Sub-Committee on the Review of National Assembly Rules, where lawmakers debated proposed amendments that will guide the impeachment inquiry linked to allegations surrounding the president’s Phala Phala farm scandal.

The meeting focused on developing a framework for how the inquiry committee should operate after the Constitutional Court ruled that aspects of Parliament’s previous handling of the matter were inconsistent with the Constitution. The judgment effectively forced lawmakers to revisit the impeachment process and establish a clearer mechanism for the inquiry.

A major point of contention during the discussions was whether finalising the revised rules would slow down the impeachment committee’s work. Members of the uMkhonto weSizwe Party argued that Parliament risked delaying accountability by spending too much time refining procedural matters instead of allowing the inquiry to proceed immediately.

MK Party MP Mzwanele Manyi openly challenged the approach adopted by the committee, questioning whether the rules review process was becoming an obstacle rather than a support mechanism for the inquiry.

Manyi insisted that the Constitutional Court ruling required urgency and warned against unnecessary delays. He argued that Parliament should already be moving ahead with substantive investigations into the allegations linked to the president instead of becoming trapped in procedural debates.

The comments triggered a tense exchange with committee chairperson Doris Mpapane of the African National Congress, who defended the ongoing process and rejected suggestions that Parliament was dragging its feet.

Mpapane maintained that the drafting and refinement of the rules were not preventing the impeachment committee from carrying out preparatory work. She told MPs that there was no provision in the proposed regulations stating that the inquiry had to pause until every procedural issue had been finalised.

According to Mpapane, administrative and operational preparations were already continuing behind the scenes, despite the ongoing deliberations over the rules framework. She urged members not to create the impression that Parliament was ignoring the court ruling or intentionally frustrating the process.

The disagreement highlighted broader political tensions surrounding the Phala Phala scandal, which has remained a source of intense scrutiny for Ramaphosa since allegations first emerged regarding large sums of foreign currency allegedly stolen from his Limpopo game farm.

Opposition parties and critics have repeatedly accused Parliament of previously failing to hold the president accountable, leading to the Constitutional Court challenge that ultimately overturned parts of the National Assembly’s earlier approach.

The latest debates also exposed divisions over how Parliament should balance speed with procedural fairness. Some MPs argued that rushing the inquiry without comprehensive rules could create legal complications later, while others insisted that further delays could undermine public confidence in Parliament’s oversight role.

Parties represented on the sub-committee have submitted various proposals aimed at strengthening the Section 89 process, including provisions relating to evidence gathering, witness procedures, timelines and committee powers. Lawmakers are now expected to continue negotiating these proposals before a final framework is adopted.

The impeachment inquiry is expected to become one of the most politically significant parliamentary processes ahead of future national elections, with opposition parties likely to intensify pressure on the governing ANC over accountability and transparency.

Despite the clashes during the meeting, Parliament appears determined to proceed with establishing a functioning inquiry mechanism in line with the Constitutional Court’s judgment. However, the sharp disagreements witnessed during deliberations suggest that the road ahead could remain politically charged as parties battle over both process and substance in the Phala Phala matter.