Tens of thousands of African migrants have fled South Africa, many ahead of an unofficial June 30 deadline set by anti-migrant groups. This mass displacement follows months of violent anti-migrant protests across the country. Several African migrants have been killed in the violence. Others have been beaten or seen their homes and shops looted, a direct assault on their livelihoods and safety.
Two Ghanaians have now petitioned the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. They are urging the institution to open a preliminary investigation into these attacks against foreigners. The petitioners assert that these actions could constitute crimes against humanity, demanding international scrutiny of the systemic failures.
The ICC petition, submitted to the court last week, alleges a "pattern of widespread and systematic attacks" against migrants. This formal complaint highlights the organized nature of the violence. It also directly accuses President Cyril Ramaphosa's government of failing to prevent or punish these crimes, including murder, pointing to a deliberate state inaction.
The State's Role
President Ramaphosa's administration has been directly implicated in the petition. The accusation centers on the government's alleged failure to protect the most vulnerable. This inaction effectively allows the violence to continue unchecked, serving to maintain a climate of fear and division.
A spokesperson for South Africa’s foreign affairs dismissed the petition as "opportunistic." This official response from the state apparatus seeks to delegitimize the claims of systematic violence and governmental complicity. Such dismissals often precede further inaction.
Ramaphosa himself has previously condemned the attacks. He warned against blaming immigrants for the country's problems, a liberal gesture that offers no material protection. These condemnations, however, have not translated into effective state intervention to halt the violence or prosecute its perpetrators, revealing the limits of symbolic politics.
Dividing the Working Class
Protesters blame migrants from elsewhere on the continent for problems at home. These include crime, unemployment, and pressure on schools and public services. This narrative deflects attention from the structural failures of the capitalist system itself.
The scapegoating of migrants for unemployment serves to divide the working class. It prevents a unified struggle against the economic conditions imposed by capital. Instead of demanding better wages or more public investment, segments of the working class are pitted against each other.
Pressure on schools and public services is a direct result of underinvestment and austerity measures. These policies prioritize capital accumulation over social welfare. Blaming migrants for these systemic deficiencies obscures the true beneficiaries of such economic arrangements. It reinforces the idea that resources are scarce, rather than unequally distributed.
The state's failure to protect migrants, coupled with its dismissive response to the ICC petition, underscores its role. It functions not as a neutral arbiter, but as an apparatus that manages social contradictions while preserving the underlying economic order. This order benefits from a divided and disempowered working class, unable to challenge the concentration of wealth.