Anti-immigration protests led by the "March and March" movement have spread across South Africa, resulting in the repatriation of about 53,000 undocumented migrants [1].
These escalating demonstrations signal a rise in xenophobic sentiment and a direct challenge to the government's ability to maintain public order. The movement's activities have shifted from organized marches to direct confrontations with migrant populations, forcing the state to accelerate deportation processes to quell unrest.
The unrest has manifested in several cities and townships, including a significant area near Johannesburg. On June 8, 2026, a notable anti-immigration demonstration occurred in a township near Johannesburg [2]. These events have been characterized by volatility, with some protests turning violent as participants targeted those without legal residency status.
Recent reports indicate that the movement has taken a more aggressive approach toward enforcement. On July 10, 2026, protesters reportedly detained undocumented individuals and handed them over to the police [4]. This vigilante-style policing has increased pressure on local authorities to act against irregular immigration.
President Cyril Ramaphosa responded to the crisis by calling for restraint to prevent further violence [3]. Despite these appeals, the "March and March" supporters continue to organize, citing opposition to irregular immigration as their primary motivation [5].
The scale of the government's response is reflected in the number of people removed from the country. The repatriation of approximately 53,000 migrants [1] marks a significant surge in deportation activity linked directly to the period of heightened social tension.
“Approximately 53,000 migrants have been repatriated.”
The rise of the 'March and March' movement reflects a deepening intersection between economic frustration and xenophobia in South Africa. By bypassing official channels to identify and deliver undocumented migrants to police, the group is effectively leveraging street violence to force a harder line on immigration policy. This creates a volatile environment where the state must balance the rule of law against the pressure of populist unrest.
