On Thursday, September 25, 2025, a scheduled court hearing in Eswatini took an unexpected turn when Judge Titus Mlangeni failed to appear, leaving the fate of four men—deported from the United States and held for over two months without charge—in limbo. The absence of the judge, for which no explanation was provided, has amplified concerns about due process and the transparency of Eswatini’s judicial system, particularly as international scrutiny intensifies over the controversial third-country deportation program implemented by the Trump administration.
The four men, hailing from Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and Yemen, were sent to Eswatini in mid-July 2025 as part of a broader U.S. initiative to relocate deportees to African nations willing to accept them. According to AP News, this program has resulted in more than 30 individuals being deported to several African countries since July. Eswatini, a small landlocked nation in Southern Africa, is one of the world’s last absolute monarchies—its king rules by decree, and the country’s record on human rights and judicial independence has come under frequent criticism from international observers.
The detainees’ plight began when U.S. authorities, describing them as "dangerous criminals" who had served sentences for crimes including murder, placed them on a deportation flight to Eswatini. Among the initial group was a Jamaican national, Orville Isaac Etoria, who had completed a 25-year sentence in the United States for murder. After spending months in Eswatini’s Matsapha Correctional Complex, the country’s most secure prison, Etoria was repatriated to Jamaica on September 21, 2025. The Eswatini government stated, “Mr Etoria has safely returned to Jamaica, where he was warmly welcomed by members of his family.” Despite his return, human rights groups have continued to demand accountability for the conditions under which he and others have been held.
The remaining four men have languished in detention for over two months, denied access to legal counsel, as reported by their U.S.-based lawyers and confirmed by multiple rights organizations. Amnesty International, in a statement released on September 19, criticized Eswatini’s authorities for obstructing confidential, in-person legal visits and only offering monitored or video-only contact, which the organization said “does not meet international standards.” Amnesty called on Eswatini to “provide legal grounds for their detention” and grant confidential access to lawyers.
Non-profit organizations, including the Swaziland Rural Women’s Assembly, have taken up the men’s case, challenging the legality of their detention without charges. Zakhithi Sibandze, national coordinator for the Assembly, did not mince words: “This is part of an institutional evasion pattern to prevent legal review of the case.” Sibandze and other activists have accused Eswatini’s judicial system of using deliberate delaying tactics to sidestep both local and international criticism. Their frustration has been echoed by lawyers and rights advocates, who point out that a second legal case—seeking to secure legal counsel for the detainees—has also been repeatedly postponed.
Demonstrators, including pro-democracy activists, have protested outside the U.S. embassy in Eswatini, holding signs that read, “Pudemo and the people of Swaziland cannot be part of this human right violation facilitated by Trump’s migration policies.” The protests underscore the local unease with Eswatini’s role in the U.S. deportation program, as well as the international community’s growing concern over the treatment of migrants sent to third countries far from their homelands.
According to Al Jazeera, the Trump administration’s policy of deporting migrants to third countries has been highly contentious, with critics arguing that it places vulnerable individuals in unfamiliar environments where they may not speak the language, lack community support, and face governments with questionable human rights records. In Eswatini’s case, the risk is particularly acute: the country’s absolute monarchy has been repeatedly criticized for its lack of judicial guarantees and for human rights violations.
Human Rights Watch, in a statement issued earlier this week, highlighted a financial dimension to the arrangement. The organization reported that the U.S. had agreed to provide $5.1 million to Eswatini to “build border and migration management capacity” in exchange for the country accepting up to 160 deportees. Allan Ngari, Africa advocacy director for Human Rights Watch, condemned these agreements, saying, “These agreements make African governments partners in the Trump administration’s horrifying violations of immigrants’ human rights.”
Eswatini’s government, for its part, has remained largely silent. Government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli declined to comment on the ongoing case, citing its active status in the courts. This official reticence has only fueled suspicions among rights organizations and legal advocates that the authorities are intentionally avoiding accountability. The lack of transparency and repeated delays have prompted Amnesty International’s regional director for east and southern Africa, Tigere Chagutah, to state, “The safe arrival of Mr Etoria to Jamaica cannot be an excuse for silence about what happened to him while he was held without charge and without full and confidential access to lawyers.”
Meanwhile, the U.S. continues to pursue further deportations to Eswatini. Among those slated for removal is Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Cuban national. The inclusion of Garcia and others in the program has drawn sharp criticism from international human rights organizations, who argue that deporting individuals to authoritarian countries with poor records on due process and legal representation exposes them to further harm and violates their fundamental rights.
The legal and ethical questions swirling around the third-country deportation program are not going away anytime soon. While U.S. authorities maintain that the individuals deported are “dangerous criminals” whose own countries have refused to accept them, this assertion has been disputed by some nations, who say they were not consulted or did not refuse repatriation. The resulting uncertainty has left deportees—and those advocating for them—caught in a web of bureaucracy and international politics.
As the world watches, the fate of the four men still detained in Eswatini remains unresolved. Their case has become a flashpoint in the broader debate over immigration policy, human rights, and the responsibilities of nations both sending and receiving migrants. The outcome will likely have far-reaching implications—not just for those currently imprisoned, but for the future of third-country deportations and the global movement for migrant rights.
For now, the halls of justice in Eswatini are quiet, and the four men wait, their legal status uncertain, as advocates continue to press for answers and accountability.