According to South African authorities, the returnees were undocumented migrants. However, Nigeria’s Acting High Commissioner to Pretoria, Ambassador Temitope Ajayi, has challenged that description, maintaining that many of those affected became undocumented because of prolonged administrative delays and inefficiencies within South Africa’s immigration system. He argued that several of them had applied for permit renewals years ago and were left in limbo through circumstances beyond their control.
Regardless of where the full truth lies, the incident raises an important question that South Africa must confront honestly: Why do suspicion and hostility toward fellow Africans continue to surface in a country whose freedom struggle was sustained by the solidarity of those same Africans?
Perhaps the answer can be found in one of the most enduring passages of Scripture, Luke 10:25–37, the Parable of the Good Samaritan.
In that biblical account, a lawyer asked Jesus a profound question: “Who is my neighbour?” In response, Jesus told the story of a man who was attacked by robbers, stripped, beaten, and left half dead along the roadside. A priest passed by. A Levite passed by. Both saw the wounded man but chose not to help. Then came a Samaritan, a member of a group that Jews generally viewed with suspicion and disdain. Yet it was this Samaritan who stopped, cared for the injured stranger, treated his wounds, and paid for his recovery.
The lesson was revolutionary then, and it remains revolutionary today. Human compassion should rise above prejudice. Kindness should not be limited by ethnicity, nationality, language, or social identity. The Samaritan did not ask where the wounded man came from before helping him. He saw a fellow human being in need and acted accordingly.
Sadly, this is a lesson that appears increasingly difficult to embrace in parts of contemporary South Africa.
For years, xenophobic tensions have erupted periodically across the country. Foreign owned businesses have been vandalized and looted. Migrants from Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Somalia, Ethiopia, and other African countries have often been portrayed as competitors, intruders, or scapegoats for broader social and economic frustrations. In some instances, such sentiments have escalated into violence, resulting in the loss of lives and the destruction of livelihoods.
Such developments are especially painful because they appear to contradict the very values upon which modern democratic South Africa was founded.
South Africa’s liberation from apartheid was not achieved in isolation. During the darkest years of racial oppression, many African nations stood firmly behind the anti apartheid struggle. Across the continent, countries opened their borders to South African exiles, provided educational opportunities, hosted liberation movements, and offered diplomatic support.
Nigeria, in particular, played a prominent role. Successive Nigerian governments invested significant resources in supporting South Africa’s freedom struggle. Nigerian citizens contributed financially to anti apartheid funds. Scholarships were granted to South Africans. International pressure was mobilized against the apartheid regime through diplomatic channels.
These acts of solidarity were not motivated by shared nationality. They were motivated by a shared sense of African brotherhood and common humanity. In many ways, Africa itself became the Good Samaritan to South Africa during its hour of need.
When apartheid left South Africa wounded and isolated, fellow African nations did not pass by on the other side. They stopped. They helped. They sacrificed. That history should never be forgotten.
This is not to suggest that South Africa has no right to regulate immigration or enforce its laws. Every sovereign nation possesses that right. No country can function effectively without immigration controls, proper documentation processes, and legal frameworks governing residency. However, there is an important distinction between enforcing immigration laws and cultivating hostility toward foreigners. The law should address legal violations. It should not become a vehicle for stigmatizing entire nationalities.
A migrant whose permit has expired should be treated according to due process. Administrative challenges should be resolved through lawful procedures. What should be avoided is the tendency to portray entire communities as the source of a nation’s problems. Unfortunately, that tendency has become increasingly common in public discourse surrounding immigration.
When unemployment rises, foreigners are often blamed. When criminal activities occur, foreigners are blamed. When public services come under pressure, foreigners are blamed. Yet these challenges are typically rooted in far more complex realities involving governance failures, economic inequality, corruption, inadequate education systems, and structural economic weaknesses. Targeting immigrants does not solve these problems.
History repeatedly demonstrates that societies searching for convenient scapegoats often fail to address the real causes of their difficulties. Instead, resentment deepens, divisions widen, and social cohesion deteriorates. For Africa, the consequences are even more serious because xenophobia threatens the very ideals upon which continental unity is built.
African leaders routinely speak about integration, cooperation, and collective prosperity. The African Continental Free Trade Area, AfCFTA, represents one of the continent’s most ambitious efforts to foster economic interconnectedness and shared growth. The dream of Pan Africanism remains alive in speeches, policies, and aspirations. Yet those aspirations become difficult to realize when Africans are treated as unwelcome strangers in other African countries.
Continental integration cannot succeed if borders become barriers not only to goods and services, but also to mutual respect and human dignity.
The lesson from Luke 10:25–37 therefore extends far beyond religion. It carries profound social, political, and moral significance. It reminds us that societies reveal their true character not by how they treat those who belong to their own group, but by how they treat those who are different. It teaches that compassion is stronger than prejudice. It teaches that dignity should not depend on nationality. Most importantly, it teaches that today’s stranger may very well have been yesterday’s helper.
South Africa’s transition from apartheid to democracy remains one of the world’s most inspiring stories of reconciliation and hope. It is a legacy that deserves protection. Recurrent episodes of xenophobia risk undermining that legacy and diminishing the moral authority that South Africa earned through its remarkable journey.
The recent controversy surrounding the status of the 268 Nigerians who returned home should therefore serve as a moment of introspection rather than accusation. If administrative failures contributed to their predicament, those failures should be corrected. If immigration laws were breached, those laws should be applied fairly and transparently. But nationality should never become grounds for collective suspicion or hostility.
The Good Samaritan crossed barriers of prejudice to assist a wounded stranger. Africa today faces a similar challenge. The continent must decide whether it will continue to embrace the spirit of solidarity that once united its peoples, or allow fear, resentment, and narrow nationalism to transform neighbours into outsiders.
South Africa, perhaps more than any other nation on the continent, understands the pain of discrimination, exclusion, and marginalization. That historical experience should serve as a powerful safeguard against xenophobia rather than a justification for indifference toward it.
As 268 Nigerians arrive home amid controversy and competing narratives, the timeless lesson of Luke 10:25–37 deserves renewed attention. For when people forget the example of the Good Samaritan, they risk forgetting a truth that transcends borders, politics, and nationality: our shared humanity is greater than the divisions that separate us.
