**
Three men recently deported from the United States to Eswatini, rather than their countries of origin, have initiated legal proceedings against the Eswatini government. They allege their detention constitutes an unlawful infringement of their rights. This case raises significant concerns regarding the treatment of deportees and the responsibilities of nations in ensuring human rights compliance.
Background of the Case
The three men involved in this legal challenge—two from Cuba and Yemen, and a third, Orville Etoria, originally from Jamaica—were part of a group deported by the US in July 2025. While Etoria has since been repatriated to Jamaica in September, his companions remain incarcerated at the Matsapha correctional complex, having spent eight months in detention.
Legal representatives for the men assert that they have completed their sentences for any offences committed in the US. Despite being labelled as dangerous criminals by US authorities, their lawyers contend that the ongoing detention in Eswatini is unjustified and raises serious human rights concerns.
Legal Proceedings and Human Rights Allegations
The complaint was formally submitted to the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR), which is tasked with monitoring adherence to human rights agreements among African Union member states. Although the Commission can call upon states to respect human rights and escalate cases to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, its lack of enforcement capabilities raises questions about the effectiveness of such measures.
Beatrice Njeri, a lawyer associated with the Global Strategic Litigation Council, which is spearheading the case, highlighted the plight of the detainees. “These individuals have committed no crimes in Eswatini and are facing ongoing violations of their human rights. They are being held indefinitely without proper access to legal counsel,” she stated.
Reports indicate that the situation has escalated to alarming levels, with one detainee reportedly undertaking a 30-day hunger strike, leading to signs of organ failure. “The frustration is palpable; they wish to return home or, for some, to the US,” Njeri added.
Eswatini Government’s Response
In response to these allegations, Thabile Mdluli, a spokesperson for Eswatini’s government, asserted the kingdom’s commitment to upholding human rights. “We affirm our obligations under both regional and international frameworks, ensuring that the rights and dignity of all individuals in our care are respected,” Mdluli stated.
She insisted that the detainees are not imprisoned but are being housed securely while the necessary administrative and diplomatic processes for their repatriation are underway. However, she refrained from providing a timeline for their return.
The Broader Context of US Deportations
The deportation of these individuals is part of a larger trend, with the US government under the previous Trump administration deporting numerous immigrants to third countries, a strategy aimed at facilitating mass deportations. Reports indicate that the US has financially incentivised nations like Eswatini, agreeing to pay $5.1 million to accommodate up to 160 third-country nationals.
Notably, other African nations such as Ghana, Rwanda, South Sudan, and Uganda have also accepted third-country deportees from the US. The implications of these actions extend beyond individual cases, raising critical questions about the international obligations of countries regarding human rights and the treatment of deportees.
Judicial Challenges in Eswatini
In a related legal development, Eswatini’s high court dismissed a previous case brought forth by local NGOs challenging the constitutionality of the deportees’ detention. The court ruled that the applicants lacked the requisite standing to bring the legal challenge, effectively sidelining concerns regarding the legality of the government’s actions.
Why it Matters
The unfolding situation in Eswatini is emblematic of broader issues surrounding international human rights obligations and the treatment of deported individuals. It underscores the complexities of global migration policies and the responsibilities nations hold in safeguarding human rights. As the legal proceedings progress, they will not only impact the lives of the individuals involved but could also set a crucial precedent for the treatment of deportees worldwide, highlighting the urgent need for accountability and reform in international human rights practices.
