Sir,

The recent revelation that five immigrants—deported from the United States - are currently being held in Eswatini ‘in transit’ is more than just an administrative footnote.

 It is a moment that forces us, as a nation, to reckon with troubling questions about sovereignty, secrecy and the value placed on public safety in the kingdom.

Until government statement, dated July 16, 2025, the arrival and presence of these immigrants were not disclosed to the public. Not a word was said. Not a press conference. Not even a passing mention.

The truth only surfaced after mounting public speculation and media pressure forced the hand of the authorities. This belated admission doesn’t inspire confidence - it erodes it.

How is it that individuals convicted of serious crimes in another country can be quietly ushered into our borders, placed somewhere on our land and kept here without the people’s knowledge?

Are we a sovereign nation or a convenient holding pen for decisions made in foreign capitals?

Government assures us that ‘rigorous risk assessments’ were carried out. Fine.

But where is the evidence? What criteria were used? Which institutions were involved? What level of risk did these individuals pose - and more importantly, who in Eswatini signed off on it?

Without details, the phrase ‘rigorous assessment’ rings hollow, the kind of bureaucratic balm applied to soothe public outrage without addressing its cause.

This is not simply a story of five unknown prisoners. It is a story of questions that refuse to go away:

• Who are these individuals?
• What crimes did they commit? What risks do they present to Eswatini’s people?
• Why was Eswatini chosen as their transit point?
• Was this a decision made in Mbabane, or merely accepted from Washington?
• Is the kingdom receiving any compensation or diplomatic concessions? If so, how much - and where will it go? If not, why are we carrying someone else’s burden for free?
• Is this an isolated arrangement or the beginning of a broader partnership?
• Will more foreign inmates arrive? Are we to become a regular transit route for international prisoners?
• Why were citizens deliberately kept in the dark?
• What else is being hidden under the veil of ‘security protocols’ and ‘diplomatic courtesy’?

This entire affair reeks of opacity. Officials are quick to invoke our ‘strong diplomatic ties’ with the United States, but those ties must not come at the cost of transparency, accountability or our national dignity.

Friendship among nations does not mean submission. It means mutual respect—and respect begins with honesty.

Let us be clear: This is not about xenophobia. This is about the principle of informed consent in a democracy.

Our people deserve to know when foreign operations intersect with our national space. They deserve to have a voice when decisions are made that could affect their safety and sovereignty.

When a government speaks only when cornered, it invites mistrust. When it cloaks its actions in euphemisms and vague reassurances, it feeds speculation and fear.

And when it fails to disclose critical matters of public interest, it fails in its duty to the people.

This issue is not going away. We, the citizens of Eswatini, demand full disclosure—not just for this incident, but as a matter of policy going forward.

Silence is not strength; it is surrender. And in the name of our sovereignty, we cannot afford to surrender.

The brutal truth is this: Either our leaders are governing with the people or they are governing over them. We must decide which version of Eswatini we are willing to accept.

How is it that individuals convicted of serious crimes in another country can be quietly ushered into our borders, placed somewhere on our land and kept here without the people’s knowledge? (Pic: Sourced)