In terms of Section 24A (1) of the Act, SCRA must review any decision taken by a Refugee Status Determination Officer in terms of section 24(3)(b) and may act in terms of section 9C (1) (c) in respect of any decision taken in terms of section 24(3)(a) or (c).
| 4.1. | Review of RSDO decisions |
| 1. | A review of the RSDO decision must be determined by a single member or, in particular matters, such number of members of the Standing Committee as the chairperson may consider necessary |
| 2. | A review will generally be determined on paper except in certain circumstances under which SCRA may request the applicant to appear before it for an interview. The circumstances referred to will be provided under rule Eleven(11). |
| 3. | In order to give effect to fair and reasonable administrative process provided for in PAJA, any applicant whose application for asylum has been rejected as Manifestly Unfounded, Fraudulent and Abusive in terms of Section 24 (3) (b), may file written representations with the SCRA. |
| 4. | The written representations referred to under rule 4. 1 (3), must be filled within 10 calendar days from the date the applicant received the RSDO decision. The representations must be sent to a dedicated email address, which is [email protected] . |
| 4.2. | Monitoring RSDO decisions |
| 1. | All decisions made in terms of Section 24 (3) (a) and (c) of the Act must be presented to SCRA by the relevant RRO within 10 days for supervision and monitoring. |
| 2. | When submitting a matter to SCRA for monitoring and supervision of RSDO decisions made in terms of section 24 (3) (a) and (c) of the Act, the full contents of the file/matter accompanied by FORM 8 (similar to BI-1691) must be included. |
