The five men who were deported to Eswatini by the United States of America have committed lesser crimes than some of the incarcerated convicts in South Africa and Eswatini.
The USA deported five people who it described as ‘criminal illegal aliens’ to the country.
The deportation of the men caused uproar, mainly in Eswatini and South Africa.
South Africa is infamous for several serial killers whose crimes shocked the nation and the world. Notable cases include – Moses Sithole (‘The ABC killer’) was convicted in 1997 of 38 murders, mostly women, committed between 1994 and 1995. His modus operandi was exceptionally brutal. Sithole was sentenced to 2 410 years in prison, without the possibility of parole for 930 years, a sentence reflecting the utmost severity with which South African courts treat such heinous offences.
Elias Xitavhudzi, known as the ‘Vampire of Atteridgeville’, operated in the 1950s, murdering and mutilating at least 16 women. He was caught and executed, illustrating the historic use of the death penalty.
Sipho Thwala (‘The Phoenix strangler’) was Active in the late 1990s as he raped and killed 16 women. Thwala was sentenced to 506 years in prison in 1999.
I want to mention that these cases were not only marked by their brutality but by the scale of their violence, leaving traumatised communities and pushing the justice system to mete out the harshest sentences available.
Eswatini cannot be left out. David Simelane remains Eswatini’s most infamous serial killer. Arrested in 2001, Simelane was convicted of the murder of 28 women, although the real number is believed to be higher, with over 40 bodies discovered.
His victims included pregnant women. Simelane’s crimes, involving rape, torture and murder were described as ‘some of the most hair-raising’ in Eswatini legal history. He was sentenced to death in 2011. Simelane’s sentence is one of the harshest in the Kingdom of Eswatini.
There have been other cases of ritual or serial-style killings in Eswatini, notably fuelled by superstitions and witchcraft, also resulting in severe sentences like life imprisonment.
By any measure, the crimes attributed to the five men recently deported to Eswatini from the USA pale in both gravity and cruelty compared to the acts of David Simelane or South Africa’s serial killers.
The men’s deportation relates to immigration offences, rape and murder, which are not extraordinary in Eswatini and South Africa.
Serial killers like Simelane and Sithole in South Africa committed crimes that horrified nations, drawing the most severe sentences under the law, such as the death penalty and thousands of years of imprisonment.
In stark contrast, the five men deported to Eswatini by the USA face accusations that are negligible by comparison. They are not facing the death penalty.
I want to say that the region has faced criminals far more dangerous and destructive than those recently repatriated.
It is an indisputable fact that our beloved neighbour has, for decades, been recognised internationally for its unfortunately high levels of violent crime.
I want to add some of the most heinous criminal offences recorded in recent history, which include:
The Modimolle Monster – Johan Kotze, dubbed the ‘Modimolle Monster’, orchestrated the rape of his estranged wife and murder of her son in 2012. He was sentenced to life imprisonment plus an additional 252 years, one of the harshest sentences handed down in SA.
KwaZulu-Natal Taxi Violence – Organised criminal syndicates have committed multiple assassinations, with perpetrators sometimes sentenced to multiple life terms.
While the crime rate in Eswatini is lower than South Africa, there have been crimes so egregious that they have shocked the nation:
There have been ritual killings linked to traditional beliefs. Armed robberies resulting in deaths have seen offenders sentenced to life imprisonment in accordance with Eswatini’s strict penal guidelines.
Offenders in these cases have not only endangered individual lives but, through their actions, have undermined the moral fabric of society and this prompted the harshest penalties available under law.
On board the flight were five deportees from Vietnam, Jamaica, Laos, Cuba and Yemen who have been convicted of crimes ranging from child rape to murder.
This was revealed in a public statement by USA Homeland Security Department Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin..
“This flight took individuals so uniquely barbaric that their home countries refused to take them back,” McLaughlin wrote on X.
Based on my research, when the United States deports foreign nationals who have committed offences on its soil but cannot safely or appropriately be returned to their country of citizenship due to risks such as persecution, war or humanitarian concerns, a ‘third-country’ may agree to host them. This arrangement is typically governed by bilateral agreements and falls under the purview of international migration, extradition laws, and, in some cases, human rights frameworks.
Legally, I have been made to understand that such arrangements are complex. The third country voluntarily assumes responsibility for individuals deemed inadmissible or undesirable by the USA, often after lengthy legal procedures. The host State must ensure that the basic rights of the deported individuals are respected, prohibiting torture or ill-treatment, in accordance with international conventions such as the Refugee Convention and the Convention Against Torture.
For the host country such as Eswatini, in the current example, I believe that accepting these offenders can bring both challenges and potential benefits.
There may be incentives including development aid, strengthened diplomatic relations and technical support from the USA.
I have been told that these benefits can be attractive, especially to countries seeking greater international cooperation or resources.
However, the burden should not be understated. Integrating deported offenders presents logistical, financial and societal challenges.
There is a need to provide adequate security, housing and, in some cases, rehabilitation or monitoring programmes.
Public services may be strained, especially if the individuals have complex criminal or psychological backgrounds.
Of course I understand that the societal impact can include fears about security and social cohesion.
Ultimately, while acting as a third country host may yield diplomatic or financial benefits, it also imposes significant moral and practical responsibilities. Host countries are expected to balance the potential advantages with the substantial obligations required to manage, support and, ideally, rehabilitate those they receive.
Addressing the issue of the five men, the Government of the Kingdom of Eswatini stated: “Five inmates are currently housed in our Correctional facilities in isolated units, where similar offenders are kept. The nation is assured that these inmates pose no threat to the country or its citizens.
It was reported that Eswatini and the US will work with the United Nation’s immigration agency to ‘facilitate the transit’ of the deportees to their country of origin.
Earlier this month, BBC reports that the USA sent eight migrants from several countries to South Sudan after a court lifted restrictions on sending people to countries where they have no ties.
McLaughlin from the USA Department of Homeland Security says the men have been convicted of serious crimes.
In a series of posts on the X social media platform, McLaughlin listed the crimes the five deported to Eswatini had been convicted of, describing them as ‘depraved monsters’ who had been ‘terrorising-American communities’.
“A safe third-country deportation flight to Eswatini in Southern Africa has landed,” she said, triggering an outcry in the kingdom.
Last month, the US Supreme Court cleared the way for the Trump administration to resume deporting migrants to countries other than their own.
Rwanda confirmed discussions have taken place, while Benin, Angola, Equatorial Guinea and Moldova have also been named in media reports as potential recipient countries.
Trump’s administration has already deported people to El Salvador and Costa Rica.
South Sudan recently agreed to hold eight men deported from the US and said they were not in handcuffs and appeared to be in good condition.
BBC reported that the war-torn country mentioned that the the deportees were kept in a civilian facility in the capital Juba, under the watch of police and the national security service.
Only one of them is from South Sudan.
In April, it must be said that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio revoked all visas for South Sudanese passport holders blaming the country for failing to accept the return of its repatriated citizens in a ‘timely manner’.
Last week, Nigeria said it would not bow to pressure from the Trump administration to accept Venezuelan deportees or third-country prisoners from the US. This was reported by Associated Press (AP).
President Donald Trump’s pledge to conduct mass deportations was a centrepiece of his election campaign and an issue on which he drew widespread support, including many Hispanic voters.
He said he wanted to deport people living in the US illegally but White House efforts have been much broader in scope – taking aim at people in the US on student visas, suspending admissions of refugees except white South Africans, and moving to revoke temporary work permits and other protections that had been granted to immigrants by previous presidents.
To crack down on immigrants, Trump’s administration has resumed raids at workplaces, a tactic that had been suspended under his predecessor, Joe Biden. Additional reporting on this matter can be attributed to journalist Nomsa Maseko.
I have to mention that President Trump had signed a memorandum of understanding to the secretaries of Defence and the homeland security directing them ‘to take all appropriate actions to expand the Migrant Operations Centre at Naval Station Guantánamo Bay to full capacity to provide additional detention space for high-priority criminal aliens unlawfully present in the United States.’
Trump had wanted to use part of the base that has housed migrants interdicted in the Caribbean to now hold certain undocumented immigrants arrested in the United States.
To be clear, the Migrant Operations Centre is a different part of the base than the one that has been used to detain terrorism suspects since 2002.
Leave a comment