A human rights lawyer in Eswatini says he has been denied access to five foreign nationals deported by the United States under a controversial third-country agreement, raising legal and ethical alarms about the Trump administration’s latest immigration enforcement strategy. The five men, originally from Cuba, Jamaica, Laos, Yemen, and Vietnam, are now imprisoned in Eswatini’s main maximum-security facility, despite not being citizens of the southern African kingdom. All five had already completed criminal sentences in the U.S. before being forcibly removed last month.

Attorney Sibusiso Nhlabatsi, representing the deportees on behalf of U.S.-based lawyers, reported that Eswatini authorities blocked him from meeting clients on 25 July at the Matsapha Correctional Complex. According to Nhlabatsi, the men have been isolated since their arrival and have been denied visits, family contact, and legal representation. In court filings, Nhlabatsi claims that this is not just a violation of Eswatini law, but of international human rights norms. Prison officials claimed they were working to install communication devices for the detainees, but gave no timeline or guarantees. The Eswatini government has refused to comment on the men’s whereabouts or Nhlabatsi’s allegations.

U.S. officials have described the deported men as “serious criminals” and “uniquely barbaric,” citing convictions for offenses including murder and child rape. However, they had served their time before being deported. Immigration analysts say that the use of third-country deportation, where individuals are sent to countries they are not from, raises grave concerns about the legal process and human dignity. Trina Realmuto, a lawyer with the National Immigration Litigation Alliance, stated that sending these men to a country they have never lived in without due process undermines the credibility of U.S. asylum and deportation policy. She also added that the program appears designed to send a political message that the U.S. can exile non-citizens to remote, potentially hostile places as punishment.

Eswatini, a small country of approximately 1.2 million people located between South Africa and Mozambique, is one of the world’s last absolute monarchies, ruled by King Mswati III since 1986. The government has been widely criticized for cracking down on dissent and restricting civil liberties. Human Rights Watch and other advocacy groups have condemned the Trump administration for striking deportation deals with such regimes, especially without transparency. In mid-July, the U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for resuming deportations to countries not listed in migrants’ original removal orders. Shortly after, Eswatini accepted the five men under terms still not disclosed publicly.

While Eswatini’s government has claimed it will collaborate with the U.S. and international agencies to ensure the men’s safe return to their countries of origin, it has also said they may be held for up to a year in solitary confinement while those arrangements are made. U.S. officials insist they only deport to countries that provide assurances against torture, but legal experts say such guarantees are often vague, informal, or ignored. The U.N.’s International Organization for Migration confirmed it was not involved in the operation and had not been asked to assist.

The implications extend beyond this one case. In recent months, the U.S. has deported individuals to South Sudan—some held for weeks in a shipping container in Djibouti—and is in discussions with Rwanda, Angola, and Moldova for similar deals. Experts say some governments may accept deportees in exchange for favorable terms, aid, trade, and visa access. Critics argue that these hazy agreements turn struggling nations into political jumping grounds. This isn’t just about immigration anymore—it’s about using human beings as bargaining chips.