West Africans deported by US sue Ghana government
Eleven individuals deported from the US to Ghana last month filed a lawsuit against the Ghana government, charging that they were illegally held in a military detention camp. The legal action reflects the chaotic fallout following the deportations, which have resulted in deportees being scattered and "dumped" into neighboring African countries. The deportees are of multiple West African nationalities, none of which is Ghanaian.
"The initial 14 [deportees] were brought to Ghana on Sept. 6," lead lawyer Oliver Barker-Vormawor explained to media outlets. "Three were deported [from Ghana] that night. Eleven were held in military detention. Out of that 11, 10 were deported with the matter in court, and eight of them are in Togo."
The deportations arose from a "third country deportation" agreement between the US and Ghana earlier this year. Ghana's parliamentary minority bloc has now called for its suspension, as leaders claim the government entered into the agreement without proper legislative approval. Samuel Abu Jinapor, a ranking member of the Foreign Affairs Committee in Ghana's Parliament, argued:
The government's conduct in operationalizing the agreement with the United States without parliamentary ratification is a direct constitutional violation of Article 75 and an affront to the authority of the [Ghanan] Supreme Court. It is therefore deeply concerning that the government continues to operationalize the agreement despite this flagrant operational breach.
Ghana's Foreign Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa told local media that the decision to enter into the agreement was not a signal of support for the US administration, but rather a decision "grounded purely on humanitarian principle and Pan-African empathy." However, reports have claimed that Ablakwa and President John Mahama may also be motivated by the hope that the White House will lift travel restrictions on Ghanaians entering the US as consideration for the agreement.
After initial pushback from federal courts, in July the US Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to enter into third-country deportation agreements with multiple nations, including Costa Rica, El Salvador, Mexico, Panama, Eswatini, Rwanda, South Sudan and Uganda. International organizations have warned that the policy risks great harm to individuals, and skirts government accountability.
The West African deportees also filed a lawsuit in the US courts last month, asserting that they were taken from an immigration facility, shackled, placed in straitjackets, and flown to Ghana in a cargo plane without meaningful notice or hearing.
From JURIST, Oct. 7. Used with permission.
Cameroon journos arrested for uncovering migrant abuses
Four journalists and a lawyer were detained in Cameroon while reporting on migrants deported there under a secretive US program. They were held for hours, interrogated, and had equipment confiscated after photographing a facility housing 15 non-Cameroonian deportees. One journalist was reportedly beaten. All five have been released.
Press freedom groups condemned the arrests as intimidation, noting Cameroon's harsh climate for media. (TNH)
US federal court rules third-country removal policy unlawful
A US federal court ruled on Feb. 25 that the Trump administration's third-country deportation policy is unlawful because it fails to provide migrants a chance to object or raise safety concerns.
The case, before the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, came out of a class action lawsuit brought by eight migrants who were removed under the Trump administration's third-country deportation policy. Migrants left the US with the intended destination of South Sudan, but instead ended up in Djibouti. Neither destination appeared on their removal documents.
In the opinion, Judge Brian Murphy analyzed Congressional intent in making deportation and immigration policy, writing:
The court ruled that the Trump administration, specifically the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), may not remove migrants to a third-country other than their own. Officials must first attempt to send migrants to the country that appears on their paperwork. Additionally, DHS must give migrants adequate notice and hearing of removal to third-countries.
In April 2025, the Supreme Court removed a preliminary injunction Judge Murphy issued against the administration’s third-country removal policy, allowing the eight men to be removed to Djibouti. The case is expected to return to the Supreme Court, as Judge Murphy allowed the Trump administration 15 days to pursue an appeal, citing the matter's "importance and unusual history." (Jurist)
Eswatini receives additional US deportees—amid rights concerns
Eswatini authorities confirmed March 12 that four additional third-country nationals deported from the United States arrived in the southern African kingdom as part of an agreement between several African nations and the US. The arrivals are part of a broader Trump administration practice of transferring migrants to countries that are not their state of origin.
The Eswatini government stated that one of the individuals is from Tanzania, another is from Sudan, and the two others from Somalia. The government stated that it remains committed "to ensuring that the rights and dignity of the third-country nationals are upheld while they remain in the country."
The transfers follow earlier deportations to Eswatini that sparked international concern. In July 2025, five men were deported from the US to the country and subsequently held in detention, a situation rights groups said amounted to arbitrary confinement without due process.
Human rights organizations have warned that such deportation arrangements can lead to prolonged detention and humanitarian risks. In October 2025, Amnesty International detailed the case of a Cuban man deported from the US to Eswatini who began a hunger strike while in custody, saying the episode demonstrated "the human cost of secret transfer arrangements and unlawful detention without due process."
Reports have also described strict detention conditions faced by some deportees in the country. Accounts cited by observers indicate that deported migrants have been held in isolation within Eswatini prison facilities, raising concerns about transparency and access to legal representation.
The broader practice of transferring migrants to third countries without clear legal safeguards may violate international refugee and human rights standards. Rights groups have previously called for accountability after deportations to Eswatini. (Jurist)
See our last report on the struggle in Eswatini.
Appeals court allows third-country removal of migrants —for now
The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on March 16 granted the government’s motion to stay a lower court order, which prohibited the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) from removing migrants to third countries. (Jurist)
Migrants deported from the US arrive in Uganda
At least eight migrants deported from the US arrived in Uganda on April 1. The Ugandan Foreign Ministry only admitted to accepting the deportees on Friday, after widespread media coverage of a statement released by the Ugandan Law Society (ULS).
On April 2, the ULS and the East Africa Law Society released a joint statement announcing that 12 people were about to be forcibly removed from the US and "dumped" in Uganda. The 12 were scheduled to arrive aboard a privately-owned aircraft without the engagement of relevant state institutions such as the Directorate of Citizenship & Immigration Control, according to the ULS.
The deportees who arrived in Uganda are African, but not Ugandan, according to the statement by the Foreign Ministry. The Foreign Ministry accepted the migrants pursuant to the Agreement for Cooperation in the Examination of Protection Requests signed in July 2025 by the US and Uganda. This "Safe Third Country" agreement permits nationals from other countries in Africa to be sent to Uganda in alignment with the principles of non-refoulement, which means that no person may be sent back to a country where they would face torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Article 4 of the agreement stipulates that operating procedures will be drafted to implement the agreement. It is not clear if those procedures have been drafted.
"Third Country Deportations" like this are permitted under US law following litigation, which brought the matter to the US Supreme Court in June 2025. The high court stayed a preliminary injunction while the case is pending. (Jurist)