Abstract
This paper examines the economic and criminal justice implications of undocumented migration in South Africa, a debate that has intensified because of persistent unemployment, anti-migrant mobilisation and contested official statistics. Adopting an interpretivist qualitative documentary design, the study synthesises peer-reviewed research, official statistical releases, institutional reports, fact-checking outputs and reputable journalism published between 2020 and 2026, analysed thematically. A central analytical distinction is maintained between evidence relating to immigrants or foreign-born persons generally and evidence specifically concerning undocumented or irregular migrants, since the two populations are not empirically interchangeable. The findings indicate a persistent gap between public narratives and available evidence. At the aggregate level, immigrants as a whole are reported to contribute meaningfully to gross domestic product and to display higher labour-force absorption than citizens, although these figures cannot be attributed specifically to undocumented migrants. Simultaneously, localised competition in the informal sector and in low-wage segments generates distributive tensions that fuel political blame. Available official statistics do not substantiate generalised claims that undocumented migrants are disproportionately responsible for crime, although the absence of nationality-disaggregated data means such claims cannot be fully verified either way. The evidence more strongly supports a structural interpretation: precarious legal status generates institutional and market conditions in which bribery, document fraud, smuggling and extortion become viable, while migrants themselves are exposed to exploitation and victimisation. The paper argues that irregularity in South Africa is partly produced through administrative failure, restrictive legal pathways and regulatory exclusion, and that the economic, criminal-justice and political consequences attributed to undocumented migrants are shaped by the institutions governing migration. Policy responses should therefore address data reform, regularisation, labour-law enforcement, anti-corruption governance and inclusive township economic support rather than exclusionary enforcement.