WeeklySA_AdminPRESSURE: Three men deported by the United States say they are unlawfully detained in the kingdom and seek African Union intervention…
By WSAM Reporter
Three men deported from the United States to eSwatini rather than their home countries have lodged a legal complaint against the kingdom with the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), alleging that their prolonged detention violates their fundamental rights.
The commission has the authority to demand that member states respect and protect rights guaranteed under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, although its rulings rely largely on diplomatic pressure rather than direct enforcement.
According to a report by the British newspaper The Guardian, the men — originally from Cuba, Jamaica and Yemen — were among a group of migrants sent to the southern African kingdom after completing prison sentences in the United States.
Two of the claimants, from Cuba and Yemen, have reportedly spent about eight months in detention in eSwatini, while the third man, Orville Etoria, was eventually repatriated to Jamaica in September.
The men were part of a group of five deportees transferred to eSwatini in July, with another ten individuals reportedly sent there in October, according to their legal representatives. Apart from Etoria, the others are said to remain incarcerated in the country.
Lawyers representing the deportees argue that their clients are being held indefinitely despite having already served sentences imposed by US courts.
Beatrice Njeri, a lawyer with the Global Strategic Litigation Council, one of the organisations bringing the case on behalf of the men, told The Guardian that the detainees had committed no crimes in Eswatini. “The people in detention have committed no crime [in eSwatini] and continue to undergo various human rights violations … they are being held indefinitely,” she said.
Njeri also alleged that the detainees have not been allowed to meet their lawyers in person. She said one of the men went on a 30-day hunger strike late last year, reportedly showing signs of organ failure before the protest ended.
“They’re totally frustrated with the situation,” she said. “They just want to go back – some of them home, some of them to the US.”
The US authorities have reportedly described the men as dangerous criminals, although their legal team maintains that they have already completed their prison sentences in the United States.
Responding to the allegations, eSwatini government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli said the country remained committed to respecting human rights and its international obligations.
“The Kingdom of eSwatini reiterates its longstanding commitment to upholding human rights and its obligations under regional and international frameworks,” Mdluli said in comments quoted by The Guardian.
“The government continues to ensure that the rights and dignity of the third-country nationals currently in the country are respected for the duration of their stay.”
In Africa, a small number of countries have occasionally received deportees under such arrangements, often quietly and on a case-by-case basis.
The deportation arrangement has also drawn scrutiny after it emerged that eSwatini received about $5.1 million (approximately R95 million) from the United States as part of the agreement to accept so-called “third-country” deportees.
According to reports by international media and human rights organisations, the funding was intended to help the kingdom strengthen its border and migration management capacity while hosting deportees transferred from the US. Under the deal,
Eswatini reportedly agreed to accept up to 160 migrants deported from the United States, even though they were not citizens of the country. Critics say the payment has raised concerns that poorer nations could be financially incentivised to receive deportees with no connection to their territory.
eSwatini is among the few known destinations where deportees have been held following transfer from the United States. Other African countries, including Rwanda and Uganda, have previously been approached in discussions about hosting migrants or deportees under various migration management initiatives, though such proposals have often faced domestic political resistance and legal scrutiny.
Meanwhile, several African governments have signalled reluctance to participate in third-country deportation arrangements, arguing that accepting deportees with no prior ties to their territory raises sovereignty, legal and human-rights concerns. The issue has become part of a wider global debate over whether wealthy nations are effectively outsourcing migration enforcement to smaller or economically vulnerable states.
The dispute is likely to intensify debate about Africa’s emerging role in global migration management. As Western countries tighten immigration controls, there is growing concern among human rights advocates that some African states may be drawn into arrangements that effectively turn them into holding destinations for migrants and deportees with no connection to the continent.
For African governments, the challenge is balancing diplomatic relations with powerful partners such as the United States and Europe while safeguarding their own legal systems and human rights commitments. The outcome of the case could therefore set an important precedent for how similar deportation agreements are handled across the continent in the future.
