US-Deported Migrants Held in Solitary Confinement in Eswatini

Five migrants expelled from the United States to Eswatini are currently being detained in solitary confinement, raising significant concerns regarding human rights and international repatriation processes. As reported by Thabile Mdluli, a spokesperson for the Eswatini government, these individuals, deported under the Trump administration’s controversial third-country program, were convicted of serious crimes in the U.S. but are now facing an uncertain future in a nation with its own troubling human rights record.

According to a statement from Mdluli on July 18, 2025, these migrants will eventually be sent back to their home countries, facilitated by the International Organization for Migration (IOM). However, the IOM has publicly stated that it has not been involved in the deportations and has not been contacted regarding their repatriation. "As always, IOM stands ready to support Member States, upon request and where operationally feasible, in line with its humanitarian mandate," said an IOM official in a Reuters report.

The migrants, originating from Vietnam, Jamaica, Cuba, Yemen, and Laos, were reportedly held at the Matsapha Correctional Complex, a facility notorious for overcrowding and poor conditions, as highlighted in the most recent human rights report by the U.S. Department of State. This report noted credible allegations of torture and degrading treatment in Eswatini’s prisons, further complicating the moral implications of their detention.

The circumstances surrounding the deportations are part of a broader strategy employed by the Trump administration to send immigrants to third-party countries, particularly those with which they have little to no connection. This practice has drawn widespread criticism, especially when the receiving countries are known to have significant political instability or human rights issues. The U.S. State Department's report on Eswatini, released earlier this year, underscored concerns about arbitrary killings and torture, painting a grim picture of the environment these migrants now find themselves in.

In the wake of these developments, it is unclear why Eswatini agreed to accept these migrants. Mdluli indicated that the terms of the agreement between the U.S. and Eswatini remain classified, leading to skepticism regarding the nature of the arrangement. As the Trump administration continues to seek partnerships with countries across the globe to manage immigration, the implications of such practices raise ethical questions about the treatment of vulnerable individuals.

The international community, including human rights organizations, has expressed alarm over the deportation of individuals to countries grappling with severe human rights crises. The case of the five migrants in Eswatini is emblematic of a larger trend wherein individuals are sent to precarious situations, often without proper oversight or regard for their safety.

In conclusion, the situation of these migrants highlights the complex interplay of immigration policy, human rights, and international relations. As the IOM and the U.S. government navigate the logistics of repatriation, the broader implications for immigration policy and human rights advocacy remain critical areas for scrutiny. The future for these individuals is uncertain, and their plight underscores the urgent need for a more humane and transparent approach to immigration and deportation practices.