Several NGOs have urged the Eswatini government to explain the legal and factual grounds for accepting five individuals into the country and to promise not to accept inmates from other countries. Civil society organizations in both Eswatini and South Africa have threatened legal action against the Swazi government for allowing five serious criminals from the US to enter. Eswatini’s Prime Minister, Russell Dlamini, stated that the country is willing to accept more deportees from the US if requested and if capacity allows.
The Swaziland Litigation Centre, the Swaziland Rural Women’s Assembly, and the Southern Africa Litigation Centre, based in Johannesburg, issued a statement threatening legal measures if the Eswatini government does not withdraw from the deportee agreement with the US. Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the US Department of Homeland Security, mentioned that the deportees, hailing from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam, and Yemen, had criminal histories that included serious offenses such as murder, homicide, and child rape. She noted that these individuals were “so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back.”
The Eswatini government has confirmed the arrival and detention of these men, claiming they pose no threat to the local population. However, the three civil society organizations raised significant concerns about their arrival, particularly in a nation facing issues like overcrowded correctional facilities, a shortage of essential medicines, and ongoing demands for a democratic, transparent government. They questioned whether the convicts were sent to Eswatini to complete their prison sentences or if they had already served their time and were leaving the US under deportation orders.
They raised concerns about whether the individuals were notified of their transfer to Eswatini and if they had access to consular assistance from their home countries, which is a fundamental right for anyone detained abroad.
“Who in Eswatini approved the acceptance of these individuals, and what legal grounds were used for this decision? Are they being held under a detention warrant or a certificate as specified in the Immigration Act? Any other form of detention would violate the Correctional Services Act No. 13 of 2017,” the NGOs inquired.
The organizations sought clarity on whether the convicts would serve their full sentences in Eswatini and, if not, the duration of their stay in the country.
“The information we have suggests that their detention in Eswatini is illegal and their removal from the United States was unlawful,” the three NGOs asserted, highlighting that Swazi law only permits two scenarios for convict transfers.
One scenario involves a Swazi citizen convicted abroad being moved to serve their sentence in Eswatini, while the other pertains to a foreign national convicted in a Swazi court serving their sentence in their home country.
They emphasized that Swazi law requires a written, voluntary consent from a citizen of Eswatini for a transfer from a foreign country. Furthermore, they pointed out that the Immigration Act categorizes anyone convicted of murder in any nation as an undesirable immigrant. Although the government can allow such individuals a temporary stay under exceptional circumstances, there has been no clarification on the length of their detention in Eswatini.
The NGOs also noted that while the Eswatini government claimed the convicts would eventually be returned to their homelands, the US had indicated it sent them to Eswatini because their countries of origin refused to accept them.
### Degrading Treatment
Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) stated that the legislation mandates that individuals slated for removal to a third country must be notified and given the chance to argue that such removal could subject them to torture or inhumane treatment.
They argued that transferring individuals who have already completed their sentences to a third country for detention would be tantamount to cruel, inhumane, and degrading punishment, infringing upon their right to due process. Practically speaking, it seems unlikely that these individuals could effectively exercise their rights due to the rapidity with which they were sent to Eswatini.
The United States has incorporated the Convention Against Torture into its domestic law, prohibiting the transfer of individuals to nations where they might face torture. In its 2024 report on human rights practices in Eswatini, the U.S. noted that overcrowded prisons there lead to inhumane conditions and that reports of torture exist within these facilities.
The NGOs urged the Eswatini government to clarify the legal and factual grounds for accepting the five individuals and to pledge against accepting inmates from other countries. They also called on the consulates of the nations of citizenship for the five individuals to promptly arrange consular services to ensure they receive legal representation.
Additionally, the organizations appealed to the Eswatini Commission on Human Rights and Public Administration, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the International Committee of the Red Cross in Pretoria, and other relevant international entities to visit the five detainees to ascertain the facts of their detention and the conditions they face.
Thabile Mdluli, Eswatini’s acting government spokesperson, told Daily Maverick, “We are not informed about threats to prevent the transfer of deportees, but we are aware of safety concerns, which we have addressed sufficiently.”
In response to rumors in Eswatini regarding Prime Minister Dlamini’s comments about potentially accepting additional deportees from the U.S., Mdluli clarified, “The Prime Minister did not state that more deportees would be accepted. The question posed was whether Eswatini would consider accepting more if the U.S. made a similar request in the future, to which the PM indicated that we would be open to it, depending on our capacity.”
Mdluli also refuted claims that the U.S. had compensated Eswatini with $5.1 million for accepting deportees. “No, we do not receive any payment from the U.S. However, the U.S. government does cover the welfare of the deportees, including the costs associated with their repatriation,” he added.
