By Mxolisi Ncube
South Africa’s Muslim communities have spent generations building businesses, creating employment, developing commercial networks and contributing to the country’s economy. Their history offers a powerful rebuttal to veteran ANC politician Tony Yengeni’s recent claim that undocumented immigrants are not investors.
In a statement on X, Yengeni declared: “Illegal immigrants are NOT investors. It’s a white lie.” His assertion reduces the complex realities of migration, entrepreneurship and economic participation to a sweeping generalisation that ignores both historical evidence and academic research.
More troublingly, such rhetoric risks reinforcing hostility towards foreign nationals while diverting attention from South Africa’s deeper economic failures, including unemployment, inequality, corruption and the persistent concentration of wealth.
The controversy has drawn criticism from academics and political commentators, including former EFF parliamentarian Dr Mbuyiseni Ndlozi, who has challenged Yengeni’s position. It raises a fundamental question: Can South Africa afford to dismiss the contributions of migrants when its own economic history demonstrates how indispensable they have been?
When migrants become convenient scapegoats
Law lecturer Dr Philani Thandani Ndlovu argues that hostility towards foreign nationals frequently conceals motives unrelated to immigration itself.
“The attack on foreign nationals is nothing but a pretext to loot businesses. Orlando doesn’t have an overwhelming presence of foreigners but it experienced a high level of violence because the reason was something other than foreign presence. The media panders to that narrative because it sells.”
Ndlovu believes that inflammatory narratives exploit the frustrations of economically marginalised South Africans, turning legitimate grievances about unemployment and poverty into hostility towards migrants.
Rather than confronting the structural causes of economic exclusion, migrants become convenient targets for public anger.
Professor Shepherd Mpofu similarly challenges the tendency to treat undocumented migrants as a single, homogeneous group. He argues that irregular immigration status does not automatically determine someone’s character, economic activity or contribution to society.
“Coming into the country and failing to follow immigration laws or being failed by immigration systems contributes to what we call illegal immigration,” Mpofu explains.
He distinguishes between undocumented migrants who commit crimes, those struggling to survive through informal work and those who establish businesses that employ South Africans.
“There are also illegal immigrants who have tried to establish themselves through running small businesses and, in some cases, they are employing one or two local people. That is a form of investment even though the person is illegally assembled in the country. Blanket denial erases those who create work for others.”
His argument exposes a critical weakness in Yengeni’s claim: immigration status and economic contribution are two separate questions. A person may lack valid documentation while still investing capital, creating employment and participating in economic activity.
Recognising that contribution does not mean disregarding immigration law. It means refusing to distort economic reality for political convenience.
Investment is more than financial capital
Butholezwe Nyathi, Chief Operations Officer of the African Development Consortium, argues that investment should not be measured exclusively by the amount of money an individual brings into a country.
“Investment is not just about money. Skills, knowledge and entrepreneurship are investments too,” Nyathi says.
He believes migrants can strengthen local economies through skills transfer, business development, employment creation and the sharing of professional expertise.
“Through migrant skills transfer programmes, they can train local workers, share expertise and strengthen local capacity. Entrepreneurship development can empower both migrants and local communities to start businesses, create jobs and stimulate economic activity.”
For Nyathi, the important question is how South Africa can harness the productive capabilities of migrants for broader national development.
This understanding is particularly relevant to Muslim migrant communities, whose contributions have historically extended beyond individual businesses to include commercial networks, education, charitable institutions and community development.
The forgotten history of Muslim enterprise
South Africa’s economic development cannot be separated from migration. From the movement of African communities across the continent to the arrival of enslaved people, political exiles, indentured labourers and independent traders, migration has shaped the country’s labour markets, commerce and cultural identity.
Muslim communities provide some of the clearest historical examples.
At the Cape, enslaved Muslims and political exiles from Southeast Asia and other regions helped establish communities whose descendants became deeply embedded in South African society. Their contributions included skilled craftsmanship, trade, religious education and the development of enduring cultural institutions.
From the late nineteenth century, Muslim traders from Gujarat established commercial enterprises across Natal and other parts of South Africa, frequently operating under discriminatory colonial restrictions.
Entrepreneurs such as Aboobaker Amod Jhaveri and Dada Abdoolla helped develop trading networks, property interests and commercial infrastructure while supporting the establishment of mosques, madrasahs and community institutions.
These were entrepreneurs who invested capital, accepted commercial risks and contributed to economic development despite facing considerable legal and political obstacles.
Their legacy continues through generations of Muslim-owned businesses that have expanded into retail, manufacturing, property, professional services and other sectors.
It is important to distinguish these established South African Muslim communities, many of whose members are citizens, from more recent migrants. Nevertheless, their history demonstrates how migration can contribute to lasting economic and social development.
Contemporary Muslim entrepreneurs from Somalia, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and other countries have also become visible participants in South Africa’s informal and formal economies.
Their businesses frequently serve communities neglected by larger commercial enterprises, providing accessible goods, extending trading hours and sustaining local supply chains.
While business practices and employment conditions vary, dismissing these enterprises as economically insignificant ignores their contribution to township and neighbourhood economies.
Research contradicts the political rhetoric
The economic evidence challenges the assumption that migrants merely compete with South Africans for scarce employment opportunities.
A 2018 World Bank study, Mixed Migration, Forced Displacement and Job Outcomes in South Africa, found that immigration had a positive effect on employment and wages among South Africans during the period examined, from 1996 to 2011.
The researchers estimated that each immigrant worker generated approximately two jobs for South Africans.
Although the findings relate to an earlier period and cannot automatically be applied to current conditions, they directly challenge the notion that immigration necessarily destroys local employment.
Research by academics Vivence Kalitanyi and Kobus Visser provides further evidence.
Their study of African immigrant entrepreneurship in Cape Town found that 82% of employees working for the immigrant entrepreneurs surveyed were South Africans. The research also identified the transfer of entrepreneurial skills from migrant business owners to local employees.
While the study involved a limited sample and should not be treated as representative of every migrant-owned business, its findings demonstrate that migrant entrepreneurship can create opportunities for South African workers.
International comparisons reinforce the broader argument. According to the American Immigration Council, 46.2% of companies on the 2025 Fortune 500 list were founded by immigrants or their children.
These findings do not suggest that migration is without challenges. They demonstrate that claims denying migrants’ economic contributions require far more scrutiny than populist political statements generally provide.
Muslim contributions extend beyond business
The economic contribution of Muslim communities cannot be measured through employment and investment figures alone.
Muslim-owned enterprises contribute to public revenue through applicable taxes and commercial activity. Community institutions also mobilise substantial resources through Zakaah, Sadaqah, Waqf and other forms of charitable giving.
These contributions support education, healthcare, food security, welfare initiatives and assistance to vulnerable households.
The Islamic obligation of Zakaah, in particular, reflects an economic principle that wealth carries responsibilities towards those in need.
Mosques, madrasahs, charitable organisations and community networks established through generations of Muslim settlement have become enduring features of South African society.
For many migrant entrepreneurs, these institutions also provide social networks that support business development, mutual assistance and integration into local communities.
The contribution is therefore not merely financial. It includes knowledge, skills, social responsibility, community organisation and cultural enrichment.
To reduce such contributions to a person’s immigration status is to ignore the wider economic and social relationships through which communities develop.
Human dignity cannot be measured in rands
Sharon Ekambaram, spokesperson for Lawyers for Human Rights, challenges the deeper assumption that a person’s worth should depend on their financial contribution.
“Firstly, no human being is illegal. We all belong to this earth as human beings,” she says.
“Seeing only those who bring money to this country as human is putting a monetary value to being a human or not. And by immigrants we are referring to our black African brothers and sisters from the African continent.”
Ekambaram argues that an excessive focus on attracting wealthy investors can obscure the dangers of corruption, patronage and economic exploitation.
For her, the real struggle should be against poverty, inequality and exclusion rather than against vulnerable migrants.
“We cannot blame migrants. Progressive forces must organise for justice, redistribution and accountability rather than scapegoating.”
Her argument resonates with the Islamic understanding of human dignity, which does not depend on nationality, ethnicity, wealth or social standing.
The Quran declares: “O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another.” [49:13]
This principle challenges the use of nationality as a basis for denying another person’s humanity.
South Africa must confront its real economic failures
Yengeni’s statement is not merely an inaccurate characterisation of migrant entrepreneurship. It reflects a political tendency to redirect public frustration towards vulnerable communities while leaving the structures responsible for economic inequality largely unchallenged.
South Africa’s unemployment crisis, unequal ownership of productive assets, corruption and failures in service delivery cannot credibly be blamed on migrants.
Nor can the country’s economic future be secured by portraying foreign nationals as obstacles to prosperity.
Immigration laws must be administered fairly, consistently and effectively. Criminal conduct must be addressed regardless of nationality. Equally, migrants who establish legitimate enterprises, create jobs and contribute to communities should not have those contributions erased through sweeping political declarations.
The history of South Africa’s Muslim communities demonstrates how migration, enterprise, faith and social responsibility can combine to create institutions and economic opportunities that endure for generations.
Their experience also offers an important lesson: economic participation cannot be reduced to a passport, a permit or the size of a bank account.
South Africa would be poorer — economically, culturally and socially — without the contributions of generations of migrants.
The real challenge is not to manufacture enemies among those struggling to build livelihoods. It is to confront the political and economic failures that have left millions of South Africans without meaningful opportunities.
Blaming migrants will not create jobs, redistribute wealth or end corruption. It will merely deepen divisions while allowing those responsible for South Africa’s economic failures to escape accountability.
