The moral acceptability and even the legality of the continued deportation of undocumented Zimbabweans who cross the border into South Africa during the current economic and political chaos, is being seriously challenged by international observers.

"The previously clear distinction between economic migrants on the one hand and refugees/asylum seekers on the other is being challenged by the growing recognition that economic grounds for leaving Zimbabwe and persecution-related grounds are not mutually exclusive and may often overlap. Based on the fact that urgent needs are shared by both categories, a comprehensive approach to the humanitarian implications of the continuing Zimbabwean exodus is needed, which takes the issue beyond an exclusive focus on refugee/asylum seekers."

This is the conclusion of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, shared with other international humanitarian agencies, during the most recent update of the international draft contingency plan for Zimbabwe. The plan was reviewed during a meeting of stakeholders in Musina.

The erratic and less than helpful role of the South African government in preparing this contingency plan also came to light in the report shared at the meeting by the UN, the International Red Cross and other international agencies.

The report states: "While, fortunately, none of the crisis scenarios identified in earlier plans have actually occurred, large numbers of Zimbabweans have nevertheless been forced to leave their country, and the outflow is continuing. They cause strains on services in neighbouring countries and many of them are in need of humanitarian assistance. In others words, while the planned-for influx into South Africa never occurred, a mass exodus with serious humanitarian consequences has been taking place to which an appropriate response is urgently required."

The report states that all available studies and assessments of the current urgent needs by, amongst others, Wits, Unisa, the SA Red Cross, Oxfam, Unicef and UNHCR, agree on the following order of priority: Protection/legal status (this includes issues such as deportation, refoulement*, safe border crossing and onward transportation, procedures and conditions related to the asylum process, risks of sexual violence and exploitation, police harassment and xenophobic violence, documentation and unaccompanied children.), shelter, food, access to health care and education and livelihood needs.

The report indicates that, as far back as August last year, there were discussions on the urgent need for the introduction of a specific temporary legal status for Zimbabweans.

"A proposal is said to be ‘lying before Cabinet’ but the outcome remains uncertain," the report states.

Recently, experts from Lawyers for Human Rights in South Africa stressed the non-refoulement principle in international law, which emphatically prohibits the forceful return of a person to a country where persecution or life-threatening circumstances can be expected. This principle is embodied in Section 2(b) of the 1998 Refugee Act: *No person maybe expelled, extradited or returned to his/her country of origin or any other country, where his/her life, physical safety or freedom would be threatened …