₦airaland Forum

Lionessza6:
And again, Europeans and Americans are not entering “because of the colour of their skin.” They are entering because of visa-waiver agreements, passport strength, tourism arrangements, diplomatic relations, and reciprocal policies between states.

You keep reducing a policy and institutional issue into race when the real challenge is that African countries themselves have not yet built the same level of reciprocal trust, coordination, stability, enforcement standards, and integration seen in places like Europe.

“Charity should begin at home” is exactly the point. African countries should absolutely improve cooperation, trade relations, infrastructure, governance, and ease of movement among themselves. But that process also requires respecting each other’s laws, strengthening institutions, and building systems that actually function consistently ... not demanding exceptions whenever someone influential is inconvenienced.

Can I come to Nigeria the same way I can go to Ireland without Visa as a black SA?

Na person wey wan argue till next year...


Or when no get wetin he wan do for 2 years dey engage you. Your mind is made up already on your xenophobic ways. Nothing anybody can tell you.


You are like the proverbial fly that follows a corpse to be buried despite warning. Or the dog that refused the call of his master's whistle and got lost!

promami:
Have you seen AfCFTA's trade policy document?

Make it make sense that an African is denied entrance and a foreigner is granted access, even though both of them doesn't have visa.

AfCFTA is a trade framework, not a continent-wide open-border system.

It does not currently override national immigration laws or automatically grant visa-free movement to all Africans. Those mobility agreements still need to be separately negotiated and implemented by African states.

So yes, under the current system, a European from a country with a visa-waiver agreement can legally enter South Africa without a visa, while a Nigerian without such an agreement cannot. That is not an immigration officer improvising racism at the airport counter .....it is the result of existing bilateral agreements and Africa’s incomplete integration process.

If that contradiction feels absurd, then the criticism should be directed at African governments collectively for failing to implement AU-wide mobility agreements, not at South Africa for applying the law that currently exists.

Lionessza6:
Then he should have made that broader AU argument without packaging it as another “South Africa welcomes Europeans but rejects Africans” story, because that framing is deliberately provocative and misleading.

South Africa did not single him out for being African. He arrived with an expired visa and was denied entry according to the law ...... the exact same thing that would happen to many South Africans landing in Nigeria or elsewhere with invalid documents.

And yes, visa waivers are deliberate policy decisions. Precisely. Which means the real issue is not a South African immigration officer doing his job, but African governments collectively failing to create AU-wide mobility agreements.

ECOWAS countries negotiated regional movement. SADC countries negotiated regional movement. Europe negotiated Schengen. These things happen through long-term state agreements, reciprocity, border coordination, and political will ....not through emotional speeches after someone’s paperwork was invalid.

So if the current African system is “absurd,” then African governments.....including Nigeria’s ....helped create that absurdity. South Africa alone cannot be turned into the symbolic villain every time continental integration fails.

At the end of the day, existing agreements were honoured, and an expired visa was treated as expired. That is not anti-Africanism. That is immigration law.

He did not for one second blame the immigration officer, I repeat.

Africans doesn't love themselves they love the expatriate.

DeepSight:
He did not for one second blame the immigration officer, I repeat.

And I never said he blamed the officer personally. Stop twisting my point.

I said the framing itself was provocative. The moment you say, “an African was rejected while Europeans walked in freely,” you are obviously painting South Africa as anti-African, even though the real issue is Africa’s failed continental integration and different visa agreements between states.

South Africa did not invent this system alone. Nigeria also has visa policies, restrictions, and bilateral agreements. So why is South Africa constantly turned into the symbolic villain every time Africa’s integration failures are exposed?

If the discussion was truly just about AU-wide mobility, then the outrage should be directed at African governments collectively for failing to implement it ....not emotionally framing South Africa as preferring Europeans over Africans for applying the exact laws currently in place.

brain54:
Na person wey wan argue till next year...


Or when no get wetin he wan do for 2 years dey engage you. Your mind is made up already on your xenophobic ways. Nothing anybody can tell you.


You are like the proverbial fly that follows a corpse to be buried despite warning. Or the dog that refused the call of his master's whistle and got lost!

And there it is .... when the facts run out, the insults begin.

You still cannot answer the simple question: can I enter Nigeria visa-free the same way I can enter Ireland as a South African? No. Because Nigeria also applies its own visa policies just like every other country.

So spare me the fake outrage and “xenophobia” label just because your emotional narrative collapsed under basic facts.

You people keep shouting “African unity” while defending a system your own governments also participate in. Then the moment South Africa applies existing law, suddenly South Africa alone becomes the villain of the entire continent’s failed integration project.

At this point you are not debating ... you are just angry that reality does not fit your victim narrative.

Lionessza6:
And I never said he blamed the officer personally. Stop twisting my point.

I said the framing itself was provocative. The moment you say, “an African was rejected while Europeans walked in freely,” you are obviously painting South Africa as anti-African, even though the real issue is Africa’s failed continental integration and different visa agreements between states.

South Africa did not invent this system alone. Nigeria also has visa policies, restrictions, and bilateral agreements. So why is South Africa constantly turned into the symbolic villain every time Africa’s integration failures are exposed?

If the discussion was truly just about AU-wide mobility, then the outrage should be directed at African governments collectively for failing to implement it ....not emotionally framing South Africa as preferring Europeans over Africans for applying the exact laws currently in place.

He is within his rights to highlight it as an oddity.
Note that by contrast, all ordinary European passport holders require a visa to enter Nigeria.

Lionessza6:
And there it is .... when the facts run out, the insults begin.

You still cannot answer the simple question: can I enter Nigeria visa-free the same way I can enter Ireland as a South African? No. Because Nigeria also applies its own visa policies just like every other country.

So spare me the fake outrage and “xenophobia” label just because your emotional narrative collapsed under basic facts.

You people keep shouting “African unity” while defending a system your own governments also participate in. Then the moment South Africa applies existing law, suddenly South Africa alone becomes the villain of the entire continent’s failed integration project.

At this point you are not debating ... you are just angry that reality does not fit your victim narrative.

K

thatigboman:
what is the purpose of visa?

To regulate and control entry into a country according to that country’s laws, agreements, security policies, and diplomatic arrangements.

Exactly why South Africa required a valid visa from someone whose country does not currently have a visa-waiver agreement with it.

You are literally answering your own question without realising it.

DeepSight:
He is within his rights to highlight it as an oddity.
Note that by contrast, all ordinary European passport holders require a visa to enter Nigeria.

Exactly. And Nigeria is fully within its rights to require visas from Europeans if that serves its interests.

But here is the irony: Nigerians themselves also require visas for virtually all European countries, while South Africans enjoy visa-free access to several of them because South Africa negotiated those agreements.

So this is clearly not about race or “Africans being hated.” It is about diplomacy, bilateral agreements, passport strength, reciprocity, and state policy.

You cannot defend Nigeria’s sovereign visa policies on one hand, accept Europe’s visa restrictions on Nigerians on the other, then act morally outraged when South Africa also applies its own immigration agreements and laws.

The real “oddity” is that Africans keep blaming South Africa for a continental integration failure created by African governments collectively .... including Nigeria’s own government.

brain54:
K

Bye boy👋

Toktee:
Sorry sir,you don't understand what he's trying to say here..... Africans ain't supposed to deny fellow Africans visa in Africa.

It's insane.

What's is the duty of African union?

Then take the argument to Aso Rock first, because Nigeria also does not give South Africans and many other Africans free entry.

If the complaint is that Africans should not need visas for fellow African countries, then that criticism applies to African governments collectively ... including Nigeria’s own government ... not just South Africa whenever an immigration issue happens there.

Lionessza6:
Exactly. And Nigeria is fully within its rights to require visas from Europeans if that serves its interests.

But here is the irony: Nigerians themselves also require visas for virtually all European countries, while South Africans enjoy visa-free access to several of them because South Africa negotiated those agreements.

So this is clearly not about race or “Africans being hated.” It is about diplomacy, bilateral agreements, passport strength, reciprocity, and state policy.

You cannot defend Nigeria’s sovereign visa policies on one hand, accept Europe’s visa restrictions on Nigerians on the other, then act morally outraged when South Africa also applies its own immigration agreements and laws.

The real “oddity” is that Africans keep blaming South Africa for a continental integration failure created by African governments collectively .... including Nigeria’s own government.

I didnt bring up race or say Africans were hated (even though significant groups of people in SA clearly have xenophobic issues with other Africans). Pleadse dont put words into my mouth.

My position is simply that Rabiu was right to point it out as an oddity and he did so at the right kind of forum and yes, the AU should consider sorting it out. I believe there is something in the pipeline. One would be right to worry if SA would endorse it though, given he amount of xenophobic violence in SA.

DeepSight:
I didnt bring up race or say Africans were hated (even though significant groups of people in SA clearly have xenophobic issues with other Africans). Pleadse dont put words into my mouth.

My position is simply that Rabiu was right to point it out as an oddity and he did so at the right kind of forum and yes, the AU should consider sorting it out. I believe there is something in the pipeline. One would be right to worry if SA would endorse it though, given he amount of xenophobic violence in SA.

Then people should also worry whether many other African countries would genuinely endorse full continental free movement once migration pressures increase on them too.

Because South Africa is not the only country on this continent with anti-immigrant sentiment, deportations, border tensions, or hostility toward foreigners. Nigeria expelled millions of West Africans in the 1980s. Ghanaian-Nigerian tensions are well documented. Across Africa, countries become far less “Pan-African” once large-scale migration starts affecting jobs, housing, crime, or local business competition.

So constantly presenting South Africa as uniquely problematic while ignoring the continent’s broader history with migration is dishonest.

And yes, Rabiu was within his rights to point out the contradiction. But that contradiction exists because African governments collectively ... including Nigeria’s ....have still not built the AU-wide mobility system they keep talking about.

And if South Africa does not endorse it, then fine .... require visas for South Africans too. Tit for tat. That is how sovereign states operate anyway.

But the rest of Africa also cannot keep acting as though one country at the southern tip of the continent is somehow preventing 50+ other African states from opening their borders to each other. Nothing stops the rest of you from implementing broader African mobility among yourselves right now. 💁‍♀️🤣

thatigboman:
just listen to yourself. Did u even read the story? He said he took full responsibility. But his only problem was that while an African was denied entry in another African country, Europeans from another continent were allowed to go in without visa.

They don't read. All they do is read the headline and run with it like headless mob.

Imindmybusiness:
They don't read. All they do is read the headline and run with it like headless mob.

Are South Africans allowed visa-free entry into Nigeria the same way they are allowed into Ireland and several European countries?

No.

So clearly this issue bilateral agreements, reciprocity, and the fact that African governments themselves still maintain visa barriers against each other despite all the AU and AfCFTA rhetoric.

Lionessza6:
Then people should also worry whether many other African countries would genuinely endorse full continental free movement once migration pressures increase on them too.

Because South Africa is not the only country on this continent with anti-immigrant sentiment, deportations, border tensions, or hostility toward foreigners. Nigeria expelled millions of West Africans in the 1980s. Ghanaian-Nigerian tensions are well documented. Across Africa, countries become far less “Pan-African” once large-scale migration starts affecting jobs, housing, crime, or local business competition.

So constantly presenting South Africa as uniquely problematic while ignoring the continent’s broader history with migration is dishonest.

And yes, Rabiu was within his rights to point out the contradiction. But that contradiction exists because African governments collectively ... including Nigeria’s ....have still not built the AU-wide mobility system they keep talking about.

And if South Africa does not endorse it, then fine .... require visas for South Africans too. Tit for tat. That is how sovereign states operate anyway.

But the rest of Africa also cannot keep acting as though one country at the southern tip of the continent is somehow preventing 50+ other African states from opening their borders to each other. Nothing stops the rest of you from implementing broader African mobility among yourselves right now. 💁‍♀️🤣

The issue seems to be SA's perception of itself as the Europe within Africa.

This is sad as SA's problems with economically disadvantaged blacks has more to do with white advantage from the Apartheid past and not with fellow Africans - many of whose countries fought alongside SA for its liberation. Nigeria went to extraordinary lengths such as nationalizing Oil Companies like Shell over Apartheid.

And it is laughable that you have to reach forty years back to find Nigeria acting the same way against Ghana.

DeepSight:
The issue seems to be SA's perception of itself as the Europe within Africa.

This is sad as SA's problems with economically disadvantaged blacks has more to do with white advantage from the Apartheid past and not with fellow Africans - many of whose countries fought alongside SA for its liberation. Nigeria went to extraordinary lengths such as nationalizing Oil Companies like Shell over Apartheid.

And it is laughable that you have to reach forty years back to find Nigeria acting the same way against Ghana.

There we go again .... the usual emotional blackmail.

Every time South Africa enforces immigration law or prioritises its own interests, suddenly apartheid, liberation struggles, and “Africa helped you” get dragged out as though South Africa must now surrender its borders forever in repayment.

Yes, apartheid left deep economic inequality and structural problems in South Africa. Nobody denies that. But pretending mass migration adds zero pressure onto unemployment, housing, healthcare, policing, infrastructure, and informal business competition is just dishonest.

Two things can be true at once: apartheid’s legacy still harms black South Africans, and large-scale migration into an already struggling economy can also create tensions. These are not mutually exclusive realities.

And Nigeria helping fight apartheid did not purchase permanent entitlement to South African immigration policy.

This “South Africa thinks it is Europe” line is also nonsense. South Africa negotiated visa-waiver agreements just like every other sovereign state does. Nigeria itself controls who enters its borders, who needs visas, and under what conditions.

Also, enough with pretending migration tensions are uniquely South African. Nigeria expelled millions of West Africans. Ghana and Nigeria have their own anti-foreigner history. Across Africa, countries become protective once migration pressures start affecting jobs, housing, and local economies.

So stop acting as though South Africa invented realities that exist across the continent.

If Africans want AU-wide free movement, then African governments must implement it collectively. Until then, South Africa is under no obligation to pretend a fully integrated African Schengen already exists.
And it is equally laughable that you speak as though anti-immigrant tensions magically disappeared from the rest of Africa after the 1980s while trying to present South Africa as uniquely defective.

The Nigeria-Ghana example was raised to prove a simple point: migration tensions under economic pressure are not uniquely South African and never have been.

And unlike Nigeria in the 1980s, South Africa today still hosts millions of African migrants, businesses, students, workers, and asylum seekers despite its own massive unemployment, inequality, housing shortages, and infrastructure strain rooted partly in apartheid’s legacy.

So spare us the selective morality where every African country’s migration politics are treated as “complex realities,” but South Africa’s are reduced to “xenophobia” and moral failure.

Lionessza6:
There we go again .... the usual emotional blackmail.

Every time South Africa enforces immigration law or prioritises its own interests, suddenly apartheid, liberation struggles, and “Africa helped you” get dragged out as though South Africa must now surrender its borders forever in repayment.

Yes, apartheid left deep economic inequality and structural problems in South Africa. Nobody denies that. But pretending mass migration adds zero pressure onto unemployment, housing, healthcare, policing, infrastructure, and informal business competition is just dishonest.

Two things can be true at once: apartheid’s legacy still harms black South Africans, and large-scale migration into an already struggling economy can also create tensions. These are not mutually exclusive realities.

And Nigeria helping fight apartheid did not purchase permanent entitlement to South African immigration policy.

This “South Africa thinks it is Europe” line is also nonsense. South Africa negotiated visa-waiver agreements just like every other sovereign state does. Nigeria itself controls who enters its borders, who needs visas, and under what conditions.

Also, enough with pretending migration tensions are uniquely South African. Nigeria expelled millions of West Africans. Ghana and Nigeria have their own anti-foreigner history. Across Africa, countries become protective once migration pressures start affecting jobs, housing, and local economies.

So stop acting as though South Africa invented realities that exist across the continent.

If Africans want AU-wide free movement, then African governments must implement it collectively. Until then, South Africa is under no obligation to pretend a fully integrated African Schengen already exists.
And it is equally laughable that you speak as though anti-immigrant tensions magically disappeared from the rest of Africa after the 1980s while trying to present South Africa as uniquely defective.

The Nigeria-Ghana example was raised to prove a simple point: migration tensions under economic pressure are not uniquely South African and never have been.

And unlike Nigeria in the 1980s, South Africa today still hosts millions of African migrants, businesses, students, workers, and asylum seekers despite its own massive unemployment, inequality, housing shortages, and infrastructure strain rooted partly in apartheid’s legacy.

So spare us the selective morality where every African country’s migration politics are treated as “complex realities,” but South Africa’s are reduced to “xenophobia” and moral failure.

I hear you, you make some fair points. Several actually. But your people need to cool down on the xenophobic violence. I saw a video the other day were guns were being shot in the presence of school children because they were children of foreign Africans. I could have wept.

Face your white oppressor more decisively. Africans are not your problem. Last I checked its whites who own over 70 per cent of your land, not other Africans.

DeepSight:
I hear you, you make some fair points. Several actually. But your people need to cool down on the xenophobic violence. I saw a video the other day were guns were being shot in the presence of school children because they were children of foreign Africans. I could have wept.

Face your white oppressor more decisively. Africans are not your problem. Last I checked its whites who own over 70 per cent of your land, not other Africans.

Maybe instead of constantly lecturing South Africans about how to run South Africa, Nigerians should spend more time asking why so many of their own citizens are desperate to leave Nigeria in the first place.

People do not migrate in massive numbers from functioning, stable, opportunity-filled countries. They leave because of corruption, insecurity, unemployment, collapsing infrastructure, poor governance, and lack of opportunity at home.

And South Africans will not be lectured by Nigerians about what South Africa’s “real problems” are or what South Africans should focus on, while Nigerians themselves are fleeing the conditions created by their own leadership and systems.

So spare South Africans the endless moral lectures while ignoring the failures that keep pushing Nigerians to seek better lives elsewhere ..... including in the very South Africa they claim to despise so much. Refugees don't get to make any rules or lecture anyone ,they take what they get.

Lionessza6:
Maybe instead of constantly lecturing South Africans about how to run South Africa, Nigerians should spend more time asking why so many of their own citizens are desperate to leave Nigeria in the first place.

People do not migrate in massive numbers from functioning, stable, opportunity-filled countries. They leave because of corruption, insecurity, unemployment, collapsing infrastructure, poor governance, and lack of opportunity at home.

And South Africans will not be lectured by Nigerians about what South Africa’s “real problems” are or what South Africans should focus on, while Nigerians themselves are fleeing the conditions created by their own leadership and systems.

So spare South Africans the endless moral lectures while ignoring the failures that keep pushing Nigerians to seek better lives elsewhere ..... including in the very South Africa they claim to despise so much. Refugees don't get to make any rules or lecture anyone ,they take what they get.

Nigeria has grave problems of its own for sure. This does not mean it will ignore a situation where its people are being killed in SA in xenophobic violence - which is a repeated problem you need to own and resolve.

Mind you I hate to say it but it casts SA in very primitive and uncivilized light.

This does not mean we dont have our own issues. We do. Massive ones. Terrorist violence is terrible here, for example.
As you yourself noted, two things can be true at once.

Stop being overly defensive young lady.

And no, Nigerians are not refugees in SA. That is unnecessarily derogative and it looks like you are taking off your mask in saying such a terrible thing.

2

Lionessza6:
Then take the argument to Aso Rock first, because Nigeria also does not give South Africans and many other Africans free entry.

If the complaint is that Africans should not need visas for fellow African countries, then that criticism applies to African governments collectively ... including Nigeria’s own government ... not just South Africa whenever an immigration issue happens there.

The entitlement they have to our country is crazy

IronGalaxy:
2The entitlement they have to our country is crazy

No one has any sense of entitlement to SA. Its not too much to ask that you quit xenophobic killings for example. Its waaaaay too much and too often. Also Rabiu saying what he said is not a sense of entitlement.

Lionessza6:
Exposure 😭

You still do not understand what “selective application” means. Immigration officers did not randomly invent different rules at the airport because some travellers were white. Different countries already have different visa agreements with South Africa before anyone even boards a flight.

So no, the issue was not “Africans vs whites.” The issue was that one traveller came from a visa-required country with an expired visa, while others came from visa-exempt countries under existing bilateral agreements.

may be u know more than the guy who had encountered with the bitter experience

DeepSight:
Nigeria has grave problems of its own for sure. This does not mean it will ignore a situation where its people are being killed in SA in xenophobic violence - which is a repeated problem you need to own and resolve.

Mind you I hate to say it but it casts SA in very primitive and uncivilized light.

This does not mean we dont have our own issues. We do. Massive ones. Terrorist violence is terrible here, for example.
As you yourself noted, two things can be true at once.

Stop being overly defensive young lady.

And no, Nigerians are not refugees in SA. That is unnecessarily derogative and it looks like you are taking off your mask in saying such a terrible thing.

You keep trying to drag this into an emotional morality play because the original debate about the expired visa went nowhere.

Nobody denied that xenophobic violence exists in South Africa. Criminal violence exists everywhere and should be condemned. What I reject is the dishonest attempt to portray South Africa as uniquely barbaric while speaking from a country battling terrorism, mass killings, kidnappings, religious extremism, banditry, and deadly insecurity on a scale far beyond sporadic anti-immigrant unrest.

And please spare me the “primitive and uncivilized” line. That arrogance is exactly why many South Africans are tired of these conversations. Nigerians want the benefits and opportunities available in South Africa, yet constantly insult the country, lecture its citizens, and act morally superior at the same time.

Also, I never said every Nigerian in South Africa is a refugee. But let us not pretend large numbers of Africans are not leaving their countries because of economic collapse, insecurity, corruption, and lack of opportunity at home. People migrate toward opportunity abd security....that is simply reality.

At the end of the day, your billionaire still arrived with expired documents and South Africa still had every right to deny him entry. Everything after that became a long emotional detour.

DeepSight:
No one has any sense of entitlement to SA. Its not too much to ask that you quit xenophobic killings for example. Its waaaaay too much and too often. Also Rabiu saying what he said is not a sense of entitlement.

Who's been "killed" lets start there?

malakaimoscondo:
may be u know more than the guy who had encountered with the bitter experience

Experiencing something personally does not suddenly change how immigration law works.

He himself admitted his visa had expired. He himself admitted Europeans entered under different arrangements. So what exactly am I “not understanding” that even he already acknowledged?

Feelings do not override bilateral agreements, visa categories, or immigration policy.

You people keep trying to turn a straightforward visa issue into a racial morality story when the legal difference between visa-required and visa-exempt countries already explains the situation completely.

IronGalaxy:
2The entitlement they have to our country is crazy

It's nauseating actually . These people are annoying. I wonder why they find it so hard to just stay the hell away from SA🤔. The obsession is scary .

Lionessza6:
You keep trying to drag this into an emotional morality play because the original debate about the expired visa went nowhere.

Nobody denied that xenophobic violence exists in South Africa. Criminal violence exists everywhere and should be condemned. What I reject is the dishonest attempt to portray South Africa as uniquely barbaric while speaking from a country battling terrorism, mass killings, kidnappings, religious extremism, banditry, and deadly insecurity on a scale far beyond sporadic anti-immigrant unrest.

And please spare me the “primitive and uncivilized” line. That arrogance is exactly why many South Africans are tired of these conversations. Nigerians want the benefits and opportunities available in South Africa, yet constantly insult the country, lecture its citizens, and act morally superior at the same time.

Also, I never said every Nigerian in South Africa is a refugee. But let us not pretend large numbers of Africans are not leaving their countries because of economic collapse, insecurity, corruption, and lack of opportunity at home. People migrate toward opportunity abd security....that is simply reality.

At the end of the day, your billionaire still arrived with expired documents and South Africa still had every right to deny him entry. Everything after that became a long emotional detour.

You are too emotional.

Lionessza6:
It's nauseating actually . These people are annoying. I wonder why they find it so hard to just stay the hell away from SA🤔. The obsession is scary .

And who is the one lurking on a Nigerian Forum?

DeepSight:
You are too emotional.

No, I am simply separating emotion from policy.

A “bitter experience” does not change the fact that different countries have different visa agreements with South Africa. That reality existed before he boarded the plane.

He came from a visa-required country with an expired visa. Others came from visa-exempt countries under existing agreements. That is the actual legal distinction, whether the experience felt unpleasant or not.

IronGalaxy:
Who's been "killed" lets start there?

Is this a serious question which lionessza6 impulsively liked?
You are not for real. Well lets stick with recent ones.

--------------
April 27 (Johannesburg CBD): Three Ethiopian nationals (aged between 30 and 45) were shot and killed inside a McDonald’s restaurant in the Central Business District. A lone gunman entered the establishment while the victims were having breakfast and opened fire at close range before escaping.

April 25 (Johannesburg): An Ethiopian migrant identified as Tofik was shot and killed.

April 28 (Johannesburg): Another Ethiopian migrant was gunned down at close range near a street stall in an attack captured on CCTV.