275,000 applications which is a far lower number than even the conservative estimates around the numbers of Zimbabweans in South Africa.37 Reasons why Zimbabweans did not apply vary from suspecting it was a ploy to deport them, to not getting passports from the Zimbabwean consulate, to not even knowing that it had occurred. For those who did manage to apply for a permit, they were given nothing more than a receipt with a stamp that made many banks, employers and police suspicious of its authenticity. After their application has been lodged in the system, an SMS is sent with a reference number. As of March 2012, PASSOP was still receiving queries from applicants who had not yet received their reference number. This documentation project, we were assured by DG Apleni, would end before the deportations start. But on October 7, 2011 the South African government released a statement that it would no longer provide protection for Zimbabweans and would resume deportations. Between October 7 and December 2011, the Beitbridge Border Post reportedly handled 7,755 deportees.38 The threat of deportations is also known to push undocumented migrants underground. Relevant NGO’s expressed concern about the resumption of deportation of Zimbabweans. There was particular concern about the timing of the official announcement. The Census was launched in October of 2011 which, with the deportations occurring, would not provide accurate information on the numbers of Zimbabweans living in South Africa. If foreign nationals are living under threat of deportation, they avoid all state institutions; including hospitals and census officials for fear that their information would be handed over to Immigration. They avoid seeking medical treatment before it is an emergency and inevitably more expensive treatment, the cost of which is shouldered by the tax payer. Methodology The goal of the report is to explore current practices in the deportation process and identify potential gaps between legal provisions and actual situations. The underlying theoretical assumption was that there are differences between officially stated laws and policies regarding the deportation procedure and policy implementation and resulting practices. i. Data gathering methods The research design of the report is based on a mixed methods approach, meaning that we used qualitative and quantitative data in order to get a comprehensive insight into the actual situations of people awaiting their deportation in South African detention centres. This approach has the advantage that we could not only capture extensive data on the experiences regarding detention and deportation of over 200 individuals, but we could also gain more in-depth knowledge on individual experiences and could include the opinion of experts and stakeholders. 37 IRIN, The Zimbabwean. “South Africa: Still no clarity on Zimbabwean deportations.” 3 August 2011. <http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/news/zimbabwe/51482/south-africa-still-no-clarity.html> 38 New Zimbabwe. “SA deports 15,000 in 5 months.” 5 March 2012. <http://www.newzimbabwe.com/news-7370-SA+deports+15,000+in+5+months/news.aspx> 17