4. Refugee Reception Office, Johannesburg: Observations of current authors Most Zimbabweans apply for asylum through the Johannesburg RRO. We therefore observed events at this RRO on 7 occasions and two different locations in the last year. We noted many irregularities that indicate that Zimbabweans have serious problems acquiring ASPs. Corruption, assaults by guards at the RRO, and fewer than 10 Zimbabweans a week being processed were a few observations we made. We noted that would be asylum seekers from the “Horn of Africa” who queue on the same day had fewer problems in accessing the RRO. We further noted that all asylum claims are being processed very slowly. In terms of the Regulations to the Refugee Act, they are supposed to be finalised within 6 months. However, ASPs from any country frequently take longer than 3 years. Even so, Zimbabwean claims seem to take longer still, with only 1% of claims having been finalised positively in the last two and a half years. RROs have problems with capacity. The Director General assured us that this will improve shortly, with 69 more refugee determination officers entering the system. It was suggested by human rights lawyers that asylum seekers are a “cash cow”, and that it suits Home Affairs officials to obstruct access to the RROs; desperate people are then prepared to pay bribes to get an ASP. However, as some people still get ASPs through the normal route, it is hard to prove bribery and inefficiency. Home Affairs Director General acknowledged the system was full of corruption, and said there was a new “Counter corruption and security” department now being set up. 5. Attitude of UNHCR to Zimbabweans RI observed that the UNHCR showed a lack of commitment to protecting Zimbabwean asylum seekers in South Africa. They made “appallingly cynical” comments to RI about Zimbabweans, and had failed to visit the border area for one year, or the Johannesburg RRO for 8 months. Human rights lawyers noted that UNHCR is very reluctant to facilitate resettlement of Zimbabweans outside of southern Africa. 6. Quiet diplomacy: at odds with acknowledging political refugees? SADC nations including South Africa have been reluctant to condemn human rights abuses in Zimbabwe and have accepted, publicly at least, ZANU PF’s claim that abuses are all linked to land reform and to the need to resist “recolonisation” by British agents. There is a clash between the policy of “quiet diplomacy” which plays down the crisis of governance and simultaneously acknowledging that citizens of Zimbabwe have genuine reasons to fear persecution and to run away in their thousands. 7. Perceptions of Zimbabweans: “Makwerekwere” It is common for refugees anywhere to attract negative perceptions and this is true in South Africa as well. South Africa has 42% unemployment and migrants compete with South Africans for unskilled work. This drives down wages and causes resentment. Xenophobic attacks on Zimbabweans and other foreigners occur regularly. There is a perception that Zimbabweans are involved in criminal activities. There is some evidence in the media for this, although precise figures could not be sourced from officials. Zimbabweans report criminal acts against them, 10