On October 6, 2025, the small southern African kingdom of Eswatini found itself thrust into the global spotlight after confirming the arrival of ten foreign nationals deported from the United States. The event, part of a controversial new deportation policy spearheaded by the Trump administration, has ignited fierce debate among legal experts, rights advocates, and neighboring countries. At the heart of the controversy is a bilateral agreement that allows Washington to transfer convicted individuals—many of them described as high-risk offenders or having committed serious crimes such as murder and rape—to Eswatini, a country with no previous ties to the deportees.
According to The Associated Press, the group of ten men arrived in Eswatini after a long journey that began in Alexandria, Louisiana, and included stops in Puerto Rico, Senegal, and Angola. Eswatini's government confirmed their arrival, stating that the individuals had been “securely accommodated in one of the country’s correctional facilities.” His Majesty’s Correctional Services (HMCS) spokesperson Baphelele Kunene added, “These nationals have been securely accommodated in one of the country’s correctional facilities as government continues to collaborate with relevant local and international stakeholders to facilitate their orderly repatriation.” Kunene also noted that the deportees were in good health and undergoing admission procedures, and that they posed no immediate threat to public safety.
While the Eswatini government has remained tight-lipped about the specific identities and backgrounds of the deportees, US officials have described the men as high-risk offenders from countries including Jamaica, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and Yemen. Notably, the group reportedly includes three individuals from Vietnam, one from the Philippines, and one from Cambodia, according to US-based immigration lawyer Tin Thanh Nguyen. Nguyen told Reuters, “I cannot call them. I cannot email them. I cannot communicate through local counsel because the Eswatini government blocks all attorney access.” He represents two of the latest arrivals and two from a previous group, but has been unable to communicate with any of them since their arrival.
This latest transfer follows the arrival of five other US deportees sent to Eswatini in July 2025, all of whom were also held at the kingdom’s maximum-security Matsapha Correctional Centre. The deportations form part of a broader US strategy to relocate foreign convicts to third countries when legal or diplomatic restrictions prevent their return to their home nations. The Trump administration has expanded this practice in recent months, sending hundreds of deportees to countries such as El Salvador, South Sudan, Ghana, and Rwanda. In February 2025 alone, hundreds were deported to Panama and El Salvador, sometimes before their asylum claims could be heard.
According to Human Rights Watch, the deal between the US and Eswatini involves financial assistance of about $5.1 million (approximately €5 million) to bolster the kingdom’s border and migration management capacity. In exchange, Eswatini agreed to accept up to 160 deportees. The rights group has urged African governments to refuse to accept US deportees and to terminate such deals, arguing that they violate international human rights law and leave deportees at risk of torture, abduction, or being stranded in unfamiliar countries without legal recourse.
Legal and civil society groups in Eswatini have launched court challenges against the government, demanding transparency about the terms of the agreement with the US and questioning the legality of detaining individuals without charge. Critics argue that the deal was signed without parliamentary approval, thereby violating Eswatini’s constitution. The government, for its part, insists it acted within its constitutional mandate. Prime Minister Russell Dlamini stated that the agreement was handled at “top clearance level,” and officials maintain that the deportees are being held under strict supervision and humane conditions.
However, human rights advocates have raised concerns about the treatment of the deportees, particularly those in the first group sent in July. Reports have surfaced of detainees being held in isolation cells and denied access to legal representation. Nguyen, the US-based lawyer, said that while the four men from the July group have been allowed to make phone calls to their families and lawyers in the US, authorities have blocked Eswatini-based lawyers from visiting them, despite a court ruling granting access. The government immediately appealed the ruling, effectively maintaining the barrier.
The controversy has not been confined to Eswatini’s borders. Neighboring South Africa, which shares a porous frontier with the kingdom, has expressed concern about potential cross-border risks. With King Mswati III—who has ruled Eswatini with absolute power for nearly four decades—at the helm, political parties are effectively banned, and critics argue that the government’s lack of transparency only fuels suspicion about the true nature of the agreement with Washington.
White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson defended the deportation policy, stating, “The illegal aliens deported to Eswatini have been convicted of heinous crimes which include murder and rape—they do not belong in the United States. The Trump Administration is fulfilling the President’s promise to carry out the largest mass deportation operation of criminal illegal aliens using all the tools at our disposal.” The US Department of Homeland Security echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that President Trump and Secretary Kristi Noem are “using every tool available to get criminal illegal aliens out of American communities and out of our country.”
Yet, the secrecy surrounding the deals and the lack of due process for deportees have drawn sharp criticism from rights groups and legal professionals across the globe. “These deportations risk breaking international law by sending people to nations where they face the risk of torture and abduction,” warned Human Rights Watch. In Eswatini, civic groups have protested the arrangement, and a separate court case over the continued detention of the four men from the July group has been repeatedly delayed, with judges failing to appear for scheduled hearings.
The US has not limited its third-country deportation program to Eswatini. Similar deals have been struck with South Sudan, Rwanda, Ghana, and Uganda, with varying degrees of transparency and legal scrutiny. In Ghana, eleven of the fourteen deportees sent by the US are currently suing the government for holding them in what they describe as terrible conditions at a military camp outside Accra. In Rwanda and South Sudan, details about the location and treatment of deportees remain sparse.
As the legal battles and diplomatic debates continue, the fate of the ten men now held in Eswatini’s correctional system remains uncertain. The government has yet to clarify the legal mechanism or timeline for their repatriation to their countries of origin, and the identities of the individuals have not been made public. For now, Eswatini’s role as a reluctant host in America’s expanding deportation strategy underscores the complex and often contentious intersection of migration, international law, and human rights in a rapidly changing world.
