
Trump and Africa: Is it legal for US to deport foreign criminals to the continent?
Is third-country deportation legal in international law?
Third-country deportations can be legal - but only under certain conditions."The whole concept of third-country removal has to be seen in light of the broader concept of asylum," says Prof Ray Brescia, from the Albany Law School in the US."There is a principle in international law - non-refoulement - which means you are not supposed to return someone to their home country if it's unsafe for them, so a third country could provide a safe option," he says.This principle not only applies to the migrant's home country but also to any third country they might be sent to.If that country is unsafe, deportation may violate international law - as when the UK's Supreme Court blocked the British government's plan to send asylum seekers to Rwanda in 2023.Due process is also essential.Nigeria has 'enough problems' and can't take deportees from US, minister says'We can't do without these people': Trump's migrant crackdown has businesses worriedMigrants must have the chance to challenge deportation if the destination is dangerous, based on evidence from credible sources like UN reports or US State Department findings. Courts are expected to assess this risk carefully."The courts should examine what kind of legal status migrants will have, if they'll be detained, and what kind of housing is provided," says Dr Alice Edwards, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.But many migrants struggle to access legal support in time."It takes significant effort and access to a lawyer who can act quickly," says Prof Brescia."That legal route may not be available to everyone."
Do the Eswatini and South Sudan deportations violate international law?
"They certainly do in two respects," says Prof David Super, from Georgetown University Law Center."There's no evidence the US is giving people a chance to challenge their deportation, and they're not permitted to send people to countries where they might face oppression."South Sudan and Eswatini have serious questions about their human rights records," he tells the BBC.When the migrants were first bound for South Sudan in May, a legal challenge was filed in a US district court after the flight had already taken off.The judge ruled that the attempts to deport the men had violated his order that migrants must be allowed to challenge their removal to third countries.The plane was rerouted to Djibouti, on the East African coast, where the men were reportedly held in a shipping container on a US military base while the case was heard.The case was referred to the Supreme Court which allowed the deportations to proceed but did not specify whether South Sudan was deemed a safe place for the migrants."What we've seen in similar cases is that people are often denied legal help when they need it, and proceedings begin far too late," says Dr Edwards."In this case, they were already en route to a US military base and that's deeply problematic."She adds that the courts must remain apolitical, especially when basic rights are at stake.Lesotho declares state of disaster amid US tariff uncertaintyUS cuts visa validity for most Nigerian applicantsTrump's tariffs could be death knell for US-Africa trade pactProf Brescia warns that the Supreme Court's decision could set a dangerous precedent."There's real concern it will encourage the administration to move even faster, before individuals can access the courts at all," he says.
Are Eswatini and South Sudan safe?
In addition to being denied due process, migrants are being sent to potentially unsafe countries - violating international law.The US State Department currently advises against all travel to South Sudan, citing threats including crime, armed conflict and kidnapping. Earlier this year, the country, one of the poorest in the world, was said to be on the brink of a return to civil war."There are very real concerns about law and order in South Sudan - about violence, instability, and ongoing conflict," says Dr Edwards.Those deported to South Sudan are reportedly being held in a detention facility in the capital, Juba, known for poor conditions, according to political activist, Agel Rich Machar. The government has not confirmed their location or how long they will spend in detention.
In Eswatini, a small landlocked kingdom in southern Africa, officials say the migrants are in a correctional facility and will be repatriated with support from the International Organization of Migration (IOM).The US State Department has said Eswatini's prisons face problems of overcrowding, poor ventilation, and deficiencies in dietary nutrition and health services."We don't foresee they will stay long enough to be integrated into society," Eswatini government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli told the BBC, without giving any indication of how long they would stay in the country, or whether they would serve the rest of their sentences first.The US government says those who have been deported to Eswatini committed "barbaric" crimes including child rape, murder and sexual assault.A backlash is growing in Eswatini.The country's largest opposition party, the People's United Democratic Movement (Pudemo) says that the agreement between the two countries was "human trafficking disguised as a deportation deal".Pro-democracy activist Lucky Lukhele says the country must not become "a dumping ground for criminals". Even if international law has been violated, Prof Super says the US is unlikely to face consequences as it does not recognise many international courts."This appears to be about deterrence, sending a message that if you come to the US you'll be treated very, very harshly," he says.Regardless of legality, third-country deportations often place vulnerable individuals in unfamiliar environments with little support or legal status, says Dr Edwards."It's a deeply flawed idea."She stresses that the human rights community is not trying to block each and every deportation - only where people face human rights violations.
What's in it for the host countries?
The details of the deportation deals remain largely secret.Ms Mdluli tells the BBC that Eswatini's reasons for accepting the deportees "remains classified information for now".However, both the Eswatini and South Sudan governments cited their strong ties with the US as a key motivation.Prof Brescia suggests some countries may fear US retaliation if they refuse, such as stricter visa rules or higher tariffs.In April, the US said it would revoke all visas issued to South Sudanese nationals after it would not accept a deported citizen.It is not clear if that has changed, now that it has accepted deportees from the US.Political activist Machar says South Sudan has also agreed to this deal as it wants the US to lift sanctions on Vice-President Benjamin Bol Mel. The US government issued sanctions against Bol Mel in 2021 due to alleged corruption and renewed them this year.However, other countries, like Nigeria, are pushing back."We have enough problems of our own," Nigerian Foreign Minister Yusuf Tuggar said in July, rejecting a request to take in Venezuelan detainees.Dr Edwards notes that such deals often come with incentives."In past arrangements of third-country deportations, large sums of money, as well as military and security cooperation, were part of the package," she says.In March, reports said the Trump administration would pay El Salvador $6m (£4.5m) to accept Venezuelan deportees.
You may also be interested in:
US cuts visa validity for applicants from four African countriesSix things Trump should know about Liberia after he praised leader's 'good English'Why Trump invited five African leaders to the White House
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
8 minutes ago
- Reuters
South Korea pledges to help companies cope with higher US tariffs
SEOUL, Aug 5 (Reuters) - South Korea will prepare measures to help companies cope with higher U.S. tariffs and expand into new markets, the Finance Ministry said on Tuesday, as it kicked off a task force to prepare the new administration's economic policy plans. On the domestic front, the government will come up with measures to boost short-term demand, as well as financial support for mid- to long-term technology development to enhance market competitiveness, it said in a statement. South Korea reached a trade deal with the U.S. last week, just days before President Donald Trump's threatened 25% tariff rate was due to come in on its exports to the United States. The trade deal set tariffs on exports from the Asian country at 15%, still higher than a baseline 10% rate and the near zero tariffs for exports under a Korea-U.S. free trade agreement. Still, topics left unresolved by the deal provide scope for more disputes as the two countries prepare for a summit between Trump and new South Korean President Lee Jae Myung in the coming weeks. Trump may use the summit to try to squeeze more concessions on areas such as defence costs and corporate investments, left out of the deal, while non-tariff barriers and currency could prove thorny issues, experts said. South Korea's Finance Ministry, however, sought to give a positive spin on the agreement. The deal reduced uncertainty over the trade environment, while a $350 billion investment package included in the deal will provide new business opportunities for companies, deepen economic cooperation between the two countries, and contribute to a more stable supply chain, the ministry said. The administration of President Lee also plans to prepare policy measures to foster new industries, such as artificial intelligence, semiconductors and "K-contents" and include them in economic growth strategies and budget plans due to be announced later this month. K-contents refers to a range of cultural and entertainment goods produced by the country ranging from K-pop to Korean dramas that have boomed globally. The ministry vowed to bring regulatory improvements to vitalise business activity, as it kicked off a meeting with the country's major business groups. Asia's fourth-largest economy grew in the second quarter at the fastest pace in more than a year on rebounding consumer spending and a surge in technology exports, but still faces headwinds from slowing global trade amid the sweeping tariffs. The International Monetary Fund last week raised its outlook for most advanced and emerging economies this year based on developments around U.S. tariff negotiations, but South Korea was among the exceptions, with its 2025 growth forecast revised down to 0.8% from 1.0%.


The Guardian
15 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Speaker Mike Johnson visits occupied West Bank to support Israeli settlers
Mike Johnson became the highest ranked US official to visit the occupied West Bank on Monday, the Republican House speaker drawing measures of praise and condemnation for his trip in support of Israeli settlements amid a worsening starvation crisis in Gaza. The excursion followed Johnson's arrival in Israel on Sunday on an unannounced visit with other Republican lawmakers, and his meeting with Israeli defense minister Israel Katz and foreign minister Gideon Saar. Johnson's visit to the West Bank is the highest profile by a senior US political figure since then secretary of state Mike Pompeo went to Psogat in November 2020 during the final months of Donald Trump's first presidency. It is a private trip hosted by a pro-Israel advocacy group, an Axios report said, and not an official congressional delegation. The outlet said Johnson traveled with fellow Republican representatives Michael McCaul, Nathaniel Moran and Michael Cloud of Texas, and Claudia Tenney of New York. Johnson told Israeli settlers on Monday that Israel was the 'rightful owner' of the contested Palestinian territory, according to a report published on the pro-Palestinian website Common Dreams, and separately, Marc Zell, the chair of Republicans Overseas Israel. Common Dreams quoted Johnson as saying that 'the mountains of Judea and Samaria are the rightful property of the Jewish people' and that the territory was at 'the front line of the state of Israel, and must remain an integral part of it'. 'Even if the world thinks otherwise, we stand with you,' he reportedly added, an apparent reference to recent proclamations by France and the UK that they would recognize a Palestinian state if Israel did not commit to a ceasefire in Gaza. His visit was immediately condemned by the Palestinian foreign ministry, which issued a statement calling Israel's annexation of the West Bank a 'blatant violation of international law'. Johnson's stance in support of the settlers, it said, 'undermines Arab and American efforts to stop the war and [the] cycle of violence, while flagrantly contradicting the declared US position on settlements and settler violence'. According to a post on X by Zell, Johnson also said the US should use the 250th anniversary of its independence next year 'to remind the American people of its Judeo-Christian foundations that were formed here in the land of Israel'. Johnson's trip comes as pressure builds on Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the growing hunger crisis in Gaza, which some critics have called a genocide orchestrated by Israel. It also comes shortly after a Palestinian American from Florida was killed in the West Bank by Israeli settlers while visiting family. The Trump-appointed ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, called the killing a 'terrorist attack'. Johnson is expected to meet Netanyahu before returning to the US on Sunday.


Daily Mail
38 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Some travelers to US could face enormous fee under new Trump proposal
The U.S. could require bonds of up to $15,000 for some tourist and business visas under a pilot program launching in two weeks. It comes after the Trump administration secured another victory in restricting visas for transgender athletes to come to the 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles. A government notice made the announcement on Monday, an effort that aims to crack down on visitors who overstay their visas. The program gives foreign service officers at American embassies the discretion to impose bonds on visitors from countries with high rates of visa overstays, according to a Federal Register notice. Bonds could also be applied to people coming from countries where screening and vetting information is deemed insufficient, the notice said. The Daily Mail has reached out to the White House and the State Department for comment. Donald Trump has made cracking down on illegal immigration a focus of his presidency, boosting resources to secure the border and arresting people in the U.S. illegally. He issued a travel ban in June that fully or partially blocks citizens of 19 nations from entering the U.S. on national security grounds. Trump's immigration policies have led some visitors to skip travel to the United States. Transatlantic airfares dropped to rates last seen before the COVID-19 pandemic in May and travel from Canada and Mexico to the U.S. fell by 20% year-over-year. Effective August 20, the new visa program will last for approximately a year, the government notice said. Consular officers will have three options for visa applicants subjected to the bonds: $5,000, $10,000 or $15,000, but will generally be expected to require at least $10,000, it said. The funds will be returned to travelers if they depart in accordance with the terms of their visas, the notice said. A similar pilot program was launched in November 2020 during the last months of Trump's first term in office, but it was not fully implemented due to the drop in global travel associated with the pandemic, the notice said. A State Department spokesperson listed the criteria that will be used to identify the countries that will be affected, adding that the country list may be updated. 'Countries will be identified based on high overstay rates, screening and vetting deficiencies, concerns regarding acquisition of citizenship by investment without a residency requirement, and foreign policy considerations,' the spokesperson said. The State Department was unable to estimate the number of visa applicants who could be affected by the change. Many of the countries targeted by Trump's travel ban also have high rates of visa overstays, including Chad, Eritrea, Haiti, Myanmar and Yemen. U.S. Travel Association, which represents major tourism-related companies, estimated the 'scope of the visa bond pilot program appears to be limited, with an estimated 2,000 applicants affected, most likely from only a few countries with relatively low travel volume to the United States.' Numerous countries in Africa, including Burundi, Djibouti and Togo also had high overstay rates, according to U.S. Customs and Border Protection data from fiscal year 2023. A provision in a sweeping spending package passed in the Republican-controlled U.S. Congress in July also created a $250 'visa integrity fee' for anyone approved for a non-immigrant visa that could potentially be reimbursable for those who comply with visa rules. The $250 fee goes into effect on October 1. U.S. Travel said that fee could hinder travel and said 'if implemented, the U.S. will have one of, if not the highest, visitor visa fees in the world.' Earlier Monday, Citizenship and Immigration Services stepped in line with Trump's wider efforts to ban transgender athletes from women's sports. The USCIS announced it has updated its immigration policy to restrict visa eligibility for transgender women seeking to compete in women's sports. Under the policy update, USCIS will consider 'the fact that a male athlete has been competing against women' as a negative factor when evaluating visa petitions in categories such as O-1A for extraordinary ability, EB-1 and EB-2 green cards for highly skilled workers, and national interest waivers. 'USCIS is closing the loophole for foreign male athletes whose only chance at winning elite sports is to change their gender identity and leverage their biological advantages against women,' said USCIS spokesperson Matthew Tragesser. 'It's a matter of safety, fairness, respect, and truth that only female athletes receive a visa to come to the U.S. to participate in women's sports.'