Nine months to earn the right to sit across from a lawyer.
Nine months after four men were flown from the United States to a maximum-security prison in the small African kingdom of Eswatini, a court has finally said they can speak with a lawyer face to face.
The Eswatini Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the four deportees — originally from Cuba, Yemen, Laos, and Vietnam — have the right to meet in person with Sibusiso Nhlabatsi, a local attorney working on behalf of their American legal teams. It was not a swift or easy victory. A lower court had already granted that access, and the Eswatini government immediately appealed, arguing that the men had no right to counsel because they had never been arrested or charged with any crime on Eswatini soil. The Supreme Court dismissed those arguments.
The men arrived in Eswatini last July as part of the Trump administration's third-country deportation program — an arrangement in which the U.S. sends migrants to nations that are not their countries of origin, typically because deportation to their home countries is difficult or impossible. The U.S. government has confirmed the four men had been convicted of serious crimes in America and carried deportation orders. Their lawyers counter that they had already served their sentences, and that holding them indefinitely in a foreign prison where they face no charges is simply illegal.
During those nine months, the men were permitted only phone calls with their U.S.-based attorneys. In-person meetings — the kind that allow for real legal strategy, for documents to be reviewed, for trust to be built — were denied. Alma David, an attorney at Novo Legal Group who represents two of the four men, said Friday that the length of the legal fight to secure something as basic as a lawyer visit reveals exactly how hard Eswatini's government has worked to deny these men fundamental rights.
Eswatini is Africa's last absolute monarchy, governed by a king, and its government has faced repeated accusations of suppressing pro-democracy movements, at times with violence. The country is one of at least eight African nations that have struck agreements with Washington to accept deported migrants who cannot easily be returned to their home countries. The U.S. agreed to pay Eswatini $5.1 million under the arrangement. Since July, at least 19 deportees have arrived in the country in separate groups; two have since been sent on to their countries of origin. Eswatini has said it can hold the others for up to a year.
The financial architecture of the broader program is substantial. A Senate Democratic staff report from February estimated the Trump administration had spent at least $40 million to deport roughly 300 migrants to third countries — in Africa, Central America, and elsewhere. Rwanda was promised $7.5 million. The deal with South Sudan reportedly included requests from that government to have U.S. sanctions dropped against a senior official accused of corruption, and for help prosecuting an opposition leader — though there is no indication Washington agreed to those terms. Senate Democrats have also raised concerns about a $7.5 million payment to Equatorial Guinea, whose ruling family faces accusations of systemic corruption and repression.
Many details of these arrangements remain hidden. The locations where some deportees are being held have not been disclosed. The duration of their detention is often unclear. As of February, internal documents showed 47 such deals had either been finalized or were under negotiation.
The Eswatini government, for its part, has not said what it will do next. A spokesperson told the Associated Press on Friday that the ruling was still fresh and that officials had not yet gathered to weigh their options.
For the four men at Matsapha Correctional Complex, Thursday's ruling is a narrow but meaningful opening — the right, after three-quarters of a year, to sit across a table from someone who can help them fight back. Whether that fight leads anywhere will depend on what comes next, in Eswatini's courts and in Washington's ongoing negotiations with governments across the continent.
Notable Quotes
The nine months of litigation required just to allow these men to meet with a lawyer speaks volumes about how hard the government of Eswatini is fighting to deny them the most basic of rights.— Alma David, attorney at Novo Legal Group, representing two of the four deported men
The judgment is still new, and the government has not yet convened to consider any potential future actions, if necessary.— Thabile Mdluli, Eswatini government spokesperson
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does it matter so much that these men couldn't meet with a lawyer in person? They had phone calls.
Phone calls are monitored, often recorded, and deeply limited. You can't hand someone a document. You can't read their face. Real legal work — building a case, reviewing evidence, establishing trust — requires presence.
The U.S. says it followed due process before deporting them. Is that the end of the argument?
It's the beginning of a different argument. Due process for the deportation itself is one question. What happens to someone after they land in a foreign prison, uncharged, is another question entirely — and that's the one nobody has answered cleanly.
Why would Eswatini fight so hard to keep lawyers away from these men?
That's the question worth sitting with. One possibility is that access to lawyers creates a paper trail, invites scrutiny, and complicates an arrangement that both governments would prefer to keep quiet.
The U.S. paid Eswatini $5.1 million. What does that buy exactly?
Officially, it covers the cost of housing and managing the deportees. Practically, it buys a government willing to hold people indefinitely without charging them — people the U.S. can't easily send home and doesn't want to keep.
Are the other seven African countries in similar situations?
The details vary, but the structure is the same — money changes hands, migrants arrive, and the receiving country handles the rest. Some deals are partially public. Many are not. The locations of some deportees aren't even disclosed.
What does this ruling actually change for the four men?
It changes the quality of their legal fight. It doesn't free them, doesn't charge them, doesn't resolve anything. But it means their lawyers can finally sit with them and figure out what fighting back actually looks like.