Impact of Trump’s Deportation Policies on Eswatini Explored in an Insightful Journey to the Tiny African Kingdom
In early October, the High Court in Mbabane, the capital of Eswatini, witnessed a significant gathering. Nearly 100 people attended a session where Judge Titus Mlangeni addressed the legality of accepting deportees from the United States. This case questions whether such actions violate the country’s constitution and has been a contentious issue since the agreement was reached months prior.
Constitutional Concerns Over Deportation Agreement
The case revolves around a deal inked in secrecy on May 14, which involved Eswatini accepting up to 160 deportees from the U.S. in exchange for $5.1 million. This arrangement, some activists claim, disregards parliamentary approval and national sovereignty. The issue escalated quickly, reaching the courts due to public outrage over the hidden nature of the agreement.
On November 3, a full court met to deliberate the constitutionality of the deal, but the decision was postponed indefinitely. This postponement is viewed by activists as a significant victory, acknowledging the serious legal implications raised by the case.
Background on Deportees
- Eswatini has received a total of $5.1 million from the U.S. as part of the agreement.
- The first group of deportees included individuals from Vietnam, Laos, Yemen, Cuba, and Jamaica, all labeled as violent offenders.
- Currently, five deportees are housed in Matsapha prison, notorious for severe overcrowding.
Reports indicate that Eswatini’s prison system operates at an occupancy rate exceeding 171%, as noted by the World Prison Brief. The deportees are being held without formal charges and lack access to legal representation, leading to concerns about their treatment under the agreement.
Activism and Legal Challenges
The arrival of deportees in mid-July sparked an activist movement. Organizations like the Eswatini Litigation Center and the Southern African Litigation Center quickly mobilized, filing urgent applications to challenge the legal standing of the agreement. They argue it violates several constitutional provisions, including the requirement for parliamentary ratification of international agreements.
Implications for Human Rights
In light of serious allegations against the U.S. deportation program, rights organizations warn that it undermines due process. Since July, over 40 migrants have been resettled in multiple African countries under similar agreements, raising alarms about human rights violations.
Eswatini, under King Mswati III’s rule, has faced criticism for its human rights record. The situation has provoked public protests and widespread condemnation from human rights advocates.
Future of the Agreement
The government insists the deportees are not a threat. However, critics argue that the lack of transparency and parliamentary oversight poses a significant risk to national integrity. Activists urge the government to publicly disclose details of the agreement and its benefits for the nation.
The ongoing case reflects broader issues concerning governance and human rights in Eswatini. With the situation under intense scrutiny, stakeholders urge for a resolution that respects both the law and the rights of individuals.
