logo
Trump administration deported ‘monsters' to tiny African country in deal catching diplomats by surprise

Trump administration deported ‘monsters' to tiny African country in deal catching diplomats by surprise

Independent5 days ago
Donald Trump's administration has resumed a policy of deporting immigrant detainees to so-called third countries, starting with the tiny African nation of Eswatini.
But Tuesday's removals of five detained immigrants from the United States to the tiny African nation of Eswatini surprised diplomats who only heard about the removal from social media, The Independent has learned
Government officials there say they intend to send those detainees back to their countries of origin — which the Trump administration says can't happen.
Eswatini's government is now working with the United Nations to send the men — who originally hail from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen — back to their home countries, despite the Department of Homeland Security labelling them 'depraved monsters' who are 'so uniquely barbaric' that those countries won't accept them.
The men allegedly have criminal convictions on murder, sexual assault and robbery charges, among others, according to the Department of Homeland Security. Two men received 20-year prison sentences, and another received a prison sentence of 25 years, according to the agency.
But the Eswatini government says the men 'will be repatriated to their respective countries' and that the United Nations International Organization for Migration is working with Eswatini to 'facilitate the transit of these inmates to their countries of origin.'
It remains unclear whether those men will remain incarcerated in Eswatini despite their lengthy prison sentences, or if they will walk free once they are no longer in the government's custody or the custody of their home countries.
Eswatini's acting government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli said the men have been sent to correctional facilities within isolated units 'where similar offenders are kept.'
'As a responsible member of the global community, the Kingdom of Eswatini adheres to international agreements and diplomatic protocols regarding the repatriation of individuals, ensuring that due process and respect for human rights is followed,' Mdluli said.
A representative from the Embassy of Eswatini in Washington, D.C., told The Independent that officials at the embassy had only learned about the removal flight from social media posts.
The State Department and Homeland Security did not contact the embassy about the removal, a representative said.
'We didn't even know we were on the list' for third-country removals, she added.
The embassy has requested information about the deportees from Eswatini's government.
Homeland Security's social media posts included mug shots of the men and what officials said are their criminal records and sentences. The men were not named.
The Independent has requested additional comment from Homeland Security, the State Department and the U.S. embassy in Eswatini.
Eswatini, formerly known as Swaziland, is a land-locked nation of roughly 1.2 million people, bordered by South Africa on virtually all sides and by the southern tip of Mozambique to the east. Its government is the last absolute monarchy on the continent; King Mswati III has ruled over the nation for nearly 40 years, and political parties are prohibited from running in elections for Eswatini's House of Assembly and Senate.
Dozens were killed in pro-democracy uprisings in 2021, and political dissent in the country has been crushed, according to advocacy groups.
The government has failed to investigate extrajudicial killings, journalists and dissidents face threats of arbitrary arrests and detentions, and detainees there were 'subjected to torture and other ill-treatment,' according to Amnesty International.
The State Department tells travelers to 'exercise increased caution in Eswatini due to crime and civil unrest.'
The Eswatini removal flight appears to be the first third-country deportation after Immigration and Customs Enforcement told officials that immigrants can be deported from the United States to countries other than their own with as little as six hours' notice — or no notice at all.
The memo from ICE acting director Todd Lyons follows a recent Supreme Court decision that opens the door for officials to send deportees to countries where they do not have citizenship, family or any other connections.
Immigrants sent to countries where foreign officials have not provided the United States with 'diplomatic assurances' that they won't face torture or human rights abuses must be provided 24 hours' notice, the memo says. Or, in 'exigent' circumstances, only six hours' notice.
Countries that do provide those 'assurances' could be deported without any advance notice, according to the memo. If the State Department believes those assurances are 'credible,' then ICE may deport someone to that country 'without the need for further procedures.'
In March, lawyers for a group of immigrants filed a lawsuit arguing that the government violated federal law by failing to let them challenge their removal to countries where they could be harmed or killed. Massachusetts District Judge Brian Murphy ordered the government to give those men 'meaningful' notice and opportunity to challenge their deportation orders.
But on June 23, the Supreme Court's conservative majority blocked the judge's decision, giving the administration the greenlight to send those men to war-torn South Sudan.
South Sudan's government said the men, all of whom were convicted of crimes in the United States, were 'under the care of the relevant authorities' but did not disclose their whereabouts, condition or what will happen to them.
None of their family members have heard from them since they arrived there, according to attorneys.
The administration is reportedly negotiating similar deportation plans with several other countries.
Since taking office, the Trump administration has held hundreds of immigrants at the naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and deported dozens of alleged Venezuelan gang members to a brutal maximum-security prison in El Salvador, marking the administration's first such arrangement of third-country removals.
Court documents revealed El Salvador's government told the United Nations that deportees held inside that country are the responsibility of the U.S. government — contradicting statements from Trump administration officials. A group hired by the U.N. has also accused the administration of state-sponsored 'enforced disappearances.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Afghan data breach cover-up is a genuine scandal
Why Afghan data breach cover-up is a genuine scandal

Scotsman

time22 minutes ago

  • Scotsman

Why Afghan data breach cover-up is a genuine scandal

Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The scandal that landed last week over the cover-up of a massive data breach of not only tens of thousands of potential Afghan refugees but also British intelligence agents and special forces personnel will run deeper and longer than the headlines and outrage it generated. We have come to expect significant data breaches, be they through incompetence and error of administrators, the criminal exploits of organised crime or political agents of foreign powers intent on bringing down our democratic freedoms. What continues to shock many people, however, is when the politicians and officials we expect to look after our interests go to extraordinary lengths to cover-up their failures, be they innocent or guilty of the original misjudgment. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Our political class appears to find no difficulty in being prepared to sign-off not just millions or even hundreds of millions – but billions of pounds to make problems we were not even aware of appear to go away. Large numbers of Afghans fled the country when Western forces withdrew and the Taliban took over Kabul in 2021 (Picture: Master Sgt Donald Allen/US Air Forces Europe-Africa) | U.S. Air Forces Europe-Africa vi Democratic scrutiny denied As if that is not a scandalous enough breach of public trust, some politicians then travel down the road of using legal processes such as super-injunctions to prevent public knowledge of their department's administrative failure to protect them from political embarrassment. The use of a super-injunction means the reporting of the actual injunction itself is not possible – so only a limited few are aware of the scandal and the legal cover-up that has taken place. It means the ordinary democratic processes of public scrutiny and accountability are automatically denied and the democratic order of making elected representatives responsible for their judgments and actions is bypassed. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad One might think the natural order of actions having consequences in a democracy would be restored when there is a change of government but, as is so often the case, the poor decisions of previous governments are very often picked up by new administrations who see there is advantage in continuing with the same approach as they too might suffer some blow-back and might want to avail themselves of the same secret protections. Veterans at risk To sum up, when the real life-threatening failure for many of sending personal data to the wrong person was discovered, a conspiracy between ruling politicians, government officials and then opposition politicians who became the new rulers resulted in several billions being committed to accepting 25,000-30,000 refugee applicants into our country. The possibility that some of those might actually not be who they appeared to be, but have criminal histories and intentions or be agents of terrorist groups cannot be discounted. Meanwhile the new government, aided by many activist lawyers working through lawfare, take it upon themselves to instigate processes that put our veterans at risk of prosecution and spend a great deal less on veterans' welfare such as housing. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Unsurprisingly, these revelations have led to recriminations about the role of some previously respected politicians who were thought to be on the side of veterans and seen as hawks in the pursuit of protecting our all-too-porous borders. Politicians such as the former Secretaries of State for Defence, Ben Wallace and Grant Shapps, have been forced to justify their actions at the time. Of course, when a scandal breaks under the pressures of competitive politics, naïve confusion and wilful misrepresentation abounds. Some politicians who were not in office at the time and had no responsibility for a particular error – such as the application for a super-injunction or the establishment of potentially costly refugee schemes that could be open to abuse – are smeared by the accusations and recriminations. Super-injunction may have backfired Establishing a timeline of when decisions were taken, whom they were taken by and what the consequences were becomes crucial in determining if the policies pursued were justifiable. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In the case of the mistaken release of data, there is now good reason to believe the pursuit of the super-injunction – while thought at the time to be necessary to protect lives – only served to elevate the importance of the data and make it more valuable to the Taliban. Sadly this type of misjudgment without consequences is all too prevalent in British establishment circles. We should recall how in June 2021, Angus Lapsley, a British official, left behind classified Ministry of Defence documents at a bus stop in Kent. They were found by a member of the public, dripping wet from the rain and handed in to the BBC. The papers included PowerPoint presentations and e-mails that revealed sensitive military recommendations regarding the UK's military presence in Afghanistan; details about the British military's response to Russia's reaction to HMS Defender's passage through disputed Ukrainian waters; further plans for a possible UK military presence in Afghanistan; details of service numbers around Kabul and arms export campaigns. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Lapsley was not dismissed or prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act but had his security clearance suspended and was redeployed to the Foreign Office. Yet this year he was appointed Britain's permanent representative to Nato. In contrast, another senior civil servant, Richard Jackson, was fined £2,500 under the Act for leaving sensitive papers about al-Qaeda on a train in 2008. Politicians must trust public Cover-ups and sometimes consequence-free misjudgments appear all too easy in our parliaments. If our political discourse and decision-making – including whom we choose to elect – is to improve, then we need to be better informed. Treating the public as children rather than adults only ever results in child-like behaviours and outcomes. For our people to make considered choices and be able to trust our politicians requires far more trust in the public from the politicians themselves. When Prime Ministers make promises before general elections, they should be expected to do everything in their power to deliver them – or learn not to make pledges they cannot keep. When politicians fail, they should be ready to accept responsibility, and only those that do should be given the opportunity for redemption – rather than shielding those who have hidden the truth from us for years and even decades.

Greece arrests hundreds of migrants after imposing asylum freeze
Greece arrests hundreds of migrants after imposing asylum freeze

Daily Mail​

time23 minutes ago

  • Daily Mail​

Greece arrests hundreds of migrants after imposing asylum freeze

Greece has detained nearly 200 migrants who arrived after an asylum freeze imposed on claimants from North Africa. 'The illegal immigrants who entered from Libya in recent hours were arrested by the coast guard,' migration minister Thanos Plevris said on X on Saturday. 'They do not have the right to apply for asylum, they will not be taken to reception centers, but will be held in police custody until the process of their return is initiated,' he added. The 190 migrants arrived in three groups south of the island of Crete, the coastguard told AFP. A fourth group of 11 people was found near the island of Agathonisi, opposite the Turkish coast. State TV ERT reported one of them was injured and later died in hospital. The move marks a further hardening of Greece's stance towards migrants under Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis' centre-right government, which has built a fence at its northern land borders and boosted sea patrols since it came to power in 2019. Greece is experiencing a rise in migrant arrivals from Libya, mainly landing in Crete, the home island of Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis. Over 2,000 people have landed just in July, sparking anger among local officials and tourism operators who have put pressure on the conservative government to take action to stop the flows. The government has declared a three-month suspension on asylum requests from any persons arriving by sea from North Africa. Earlier this month, dozens of migrants were seen in shocking footage leaping off a boat and running onto a beach in front of tourists on a Greek holiday island. In one clip, recorded at Diskos beach in the south of Crete, a group of asylum seekers were seen crammed in to a small boat as it bobbed near the shoreline. The concerning levels of sea arrivals prompted a visit by Greece's foreign minister George Gerapetritis to eastern Libyan commander Khalifa Haftar this month. Last month Athens also said it would deploy two frigates near Libyan territorial waters to help stem the flow. It urged Libya to cooperate more closely with Greece and the EU to stop migrants sailing from there or turn them back before they exit Libyan territorial waters. The North African country has remained deeply divided since the 2011 NATO-backed revolt that toppled and killed longtime leader Moamer Kadhafi. Human rights groups accuse Greece of forcefully turning back asylum-seekers on its sea and land borders. This year, the European Union border agency said it was reviewing 12 cases of potential human rights violations by Greece. The government denies wrongdoing. Greece was on the front line of migration crisis in 2015-16 when hundreds of thousands of migrants from the Middle East, Asia and Africa passed through its islands and mainland.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store