Rights group condemns US transfers of migrants to third-country African states
The US has deployed a controversial deportation strategy of sending migrants to third-party African nations where they are not citizens, rather than to their home countries. Since Donald Trump's return to the White House in January 2025, over 500 people have been sent to countries including Eswatini, Ghana, Cameroon, and South Sudan. Human Rights Watch argues this practice violates international law and is designed deliberately to inflict suffering as a deterrent to migration.
HRW interviewed 24 third-country nationals and documented serious abuses: arbitrary detention, ill-treatment, denial of medication and adequate food, and deportees chained for approximately 18 hours with no knowledge of their destination. At least a dozen LGBT individuals were sent to nations that criminalise same-sex relations, some of whom had been granted US protection because of persecution risks based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The group also found people subsequently transferred to their home countries despite risks of torture or persecution, violating the international principle of non-refoulement. The Department of Homeland Security maintains the removals are justified on public safety grounds.
- US sends over 500 migrants to African nations under Trump's policy since 2025.
- Rights group alleges practice violates law, causes deliberate suffering to deter migration.
- LGBT deportees sent to countries criminalising same-sex relations, some later sent home.
New here? Start with this
The United States has been using a controversial approach to immigration enforcement that involves sending migrants to African nations where they are not citizens, rather than returning them to their own countries. Since the Trump administration took office in January 2025, over 500 people have been transferred to nations including Eswatini, Ghana, Cameroon, and South Sudan. This strategy differs from traditional deportation procedures, which typically return migrants to their countries of origin.
Human Rights Watch has documented serious allegations of abuse during these transfers, including arbitrary detention, lack of adequate food and medicine, and individuals being chained for extended periods. The group is particularly concerned about LGBT migrants who were sent to countries where same-sex relations are criminalised, despite some having originally received US protection because of persecution risks related to their sexual orientation. The organisation also argues that some deportees have subsequently been transferred to their home countries in violation of international law protecting people from return to places where they face torture or persecution.
The US Department of Homeland Security has defended the removals as necessary for public safety reasons. The practice has become a focal point in the broader debate over immigration policy, with critics arguing it violates international legal obligations whilst officials maintain it represents a legitimate enforcement tool.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
States possess legitimate authority over immigration enforcement and border management. Third-country deportations to stable nations with whom the US has bilateral agreements represent a lawful policy option within that authority, particularly where proper procedures are followed and safety standards are met. Public safety concerns are real and serve as valid justification for migration control measures. Deterrence through consequences serves a policy purpose that can address unsustainable migration pressures without necessarily violating international obligations.
The case against
International law—including the Refugee Convention, Convention Against Torture, and the principle of non-refoulement—explicitly prohibits transferring individuals to places where they face torture, persecution, or serious harm. The documented evidence presents serious violations: reported denial of food and medicine, extended chaining of detainees, and particularly the transfer of LGBT individuals to countries criminalising their identity despite the US having previously recognised their persecution risks. These practices appear deliberately designed to inflict suffering as deterrent, which violates both specific legal obligations and fundamental humanitarian principles.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by BBC World as “US deportations to African countries unlawful and exploit suffering, rights group says”.