Respected Nigerian human rights lawyer and Member of the Board of Directors of the Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), Femi Falana (SAN), has petitioned the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) over persistent threats to the safety and security of other African nationals in the Republic of South Africa.
In the petition, which is submitted pursuant to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, lawyer Falana called on the Commission “to urgently intervene and refer the matter to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights for a binding adjudication.”
The petition highlights “a pattern of widespread and recurring xenophobic violence, including killings, physical assaults, arbitrary arrests, torture, looting of businesses, and forced displacement.”
“These attacks are neither isolated nor sporadic but reflect a systemic failure to protect foreign nationals,” Falana said.
The petition, read in part: “There remains a persistent, widespread, and well-documented pattern of xenophobic violence, intimidation, and discrimination against Nigerians and other African nationals in the Republic of South Africa.”
He emphasised that, “Recent incidents further underscore the gravity and continuity of these violations. According to the Nigerian Consulate-General in Johannesburg, two Nigerian nationals, Amaramiro Emmanuel and Ekpenyong Andrew, were killed in April 2026 in separate incidents involving personnel of the South African National Defence Force (SANDF).”
Lawyer Falana reiterated that apart from the killings there has been a resurgence of violent mob attacks against African migrants.
“In several instances, individuals were beaten with sticks, harassed, and subjected to degrading treatment, accompanied by inflammatory rhetoric targeting foreigners. These incidents have been reported across multiple locations, including Gauteng Province, Durban, Cape Town, East London, and parts of KwaZulu-Natal and the Eastern Cape,” the petition noted.
On Nigeria, he pointed out that by 2019, some 127 Nigerians had been killed in South Africa. “There were protests by the youths who called for the nationalisation of South African companies in Nigeria. To assuage the feelings of the Nigerian people, the Government of South Africa apologised to the Government of Nigeria over the xenophobic attacks.”
“However, instead of directing the security forces to arrest and prosecute the ongoing xenophobic attacks, President Cyril Ramaphosa has asked African migrants to respect the laws, tradition and customs of South Africa,” the petition lamented.
“It is curious to note that President Cyril Ramaphosa has since turned round to deny the xenophobic attacks unleashed on African migrants.
Mr. Falana observed that the petition was pursuant to Articles 45 and 55 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“the Charter”) and in accordance with the Rules of Procedure of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
“This communication also seeks urgent intervention by the Commission and, in particular, requests the referral of this matter to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“the Court”) pursuant to Articles 5(1)(a) and 6(1) of the Protocol to the African Charter on the Establishment of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights.”
Other details of the petition are captured below:
This communication is submitted in line with the Commission’s mandate to receive and consider communications alleging violations of the Charter under Article 55. The communication satisfies the admissibility requirements set out under Article 56 of the Charter and further elaborated in the Commission’s Rules of Procedure.
“These include Rule 93 (Seizure of the Commission): This communication respectfully requests the Commission to be seized of the matter given its gravity and urgency. Rules 105–109 (Admissibility of Communications): The communication is compatible with the Charter, is not based exclusively on media reports, and concerns serious and ongoing violations.
Rule 118 (Referral to the African Court): The Commission is empowered to refer cases to the Court where it considers that a State has not complied with its recommendations or where the matter reveals serious or massive violations. Given the persistent nature of the violations and the absence of effective remedies, this matter warrants immediate consideration and escalation.
Despite the repeated xenophobic attacks on African migrants, there has been a consistent failure on the part of the Government of South Africa to exercise due diligence in preventing these attacks, protecting affected individuals, conducting prompt and impartial investigations, prosecuting perpetrators, and providing effective remedies to victims.
This failure has fostered a climate of impunity, emboldening perpetrators and perpetuating cycles of violence.
The cumulative effect of these acts constitutes continuing violations of the provisions of the African Charter, engaging the responsibility of the State for both acts and omissions, including the failure to protect individuals within its jurisdiction from harm by state and non-state actors alike.
The several xenophobic attacks constitute serious violations of the human rights guaranteed by several provisions of the Charter, including: Failure to adopt effective measures to give effect to Charter rights; Article 2: Discrimination based on nationality; and Article 3: Denial of equal protection of the law.
Others include Article 4: Violations of the right to life; Article 5: Inhuman and degrading treatment; Article 6: Threats to personal liberty and security; Article 12: Restrictions on freedom of movement; Article 14: Violations of property rights; and Article 18: Disruption of family protection.
The obligation of due diligence under Article 1 requires the State not only to refrain from violations but to actively prevent, investigate, and remedy harm caused by both State and non-State actors. The continued insecurity faced by Nigerians and other African migrants in South Africa undermines the fundamental values of the African human rights system, including dignity, equality, and solidarity.
This communication presents a critical opportunity for the Commission to exercise its mandates decisively by invoking its protective mandate, applying established jurisprudence, and referring this matter to the African Court for binding adjudication. Such action will ensure justice for victims and reinforce the credibility and effectiveness of regional human rights mechanisms.
The Commission has consistently held that State responsibility arises from failure to exercise due diligence. The Commission affirmed that failure to prevent and respond to abuses by non-state actors constitutes a violation of the Charter.
The Commission has held that tolerance of widespread violence and failure to investigate and prosecute perpetrators violates Articles 1 and 4. States must ensure effective protection of rights and provide remedies, including in cases involving systemic violations.
States must prevent, investigate, and punish violations, even where committed by private actors. Failure to act with due diligence engages State responsibility. Systemic violence combined with State inaction constitutes violations of the rights to life, dignity, and non-discrimination, and requires structural responses.
Tolerance of patterns of violence and ineffective remedies perpetuate impunity and violate fundamental rights. These principles are directly applicable to the present communication.
Both African and comparative jurisprudence affirm that victims are entitled to full and effective remedies, including: restitution; compensation; rehabilitation; satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition.
The continued denial of such remedies constitutes an ongoing violation of the Charter.
This matter meets the threshold for referral under the Protocol and the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, particularly: the serious and widespread nature of violations; the persistence and recurrence of harm; the lack of effective domestic remedies; and the need for binding and enforceable orders.
Under Rule 118 of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission is empowered to refer a matter to the Court, especially where there is non-compliance or serious violations. Pursuant to Articles 5(1)(a) and 6(1) of the Protocol, the Commission is expressly authorised to submit cases to the Court, and the Court has jurisdiction under Article 3 to adjudicate such matters.
Falana therefore called on the African Commission to:
- Be seized of this communication pursuant to Rule 93 of its Rules of Procedure.
- Find that the Republic of South Africa is in violation of its obligations under the African Charter, including Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 14, and 18.
- Conduct a thorough and independent investigation into ongoing xenophobic violence affecting Nigerians and other African nationals.
- Refer this matter to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights pursuant to Rule 118 and Articles 5(1)(a) and 6(1) of the Protocol, seeking:
- A declaration of violations, adequate compensation and reparation for victims, guarantees of non-repetition, structural and institutional reforms.
- Invoke Article 58 of the Charter to bring the matter before the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union as one involving serious or massive violations.
- Call upon the Government of South Africa to ensure accountability for perpetrators, strengthen protection mechanisms for foreign nationals, end incitement to xenophobic violence, address structural causes of discrimination and insecurity.
