Inhlase

CIVIL SOCIETY ORGs CONSIDER APPEAL AS HIGH COURT DISMISSES CHALLENGE TO ESWATINI–US DEPORTATION DEAL — WITHOUT RULING ON CONSTITUTIONALITY

By Zwelethu Dlamini

The High Court has dismissed a legal challenge to Eswatini’s controversial deportation arrangement with the United States — not because the deal was found lawful, but because the court ruled that the applicants lacked legal standing (locus standi).

As a result, the court did not consider whether the agreement violates the Constitution, bypassed Parliament, or breached human-rights standards.

The application followed the July 2025 arrival of five men deported by the United States, who were placed under maximum-security detention in Eswatini.

Applicants argued that:
• the agreement was never disclosed or tabled before Parliament,
• it violated constitutional provisions on ratification and transparency,
• detainees were held without clear legal authority or public accountability.

The judges held that the applicants did not have a direct personal interest in the matter and therefore could not approach the court.

Because standing is a threshold issue, the court said there was no need to deal with the substance of the constitutional and human-rights claims.

Civil society organisations say the ruling leaves dangerous gaps in accountability.

The Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) warned that the decision places the constitutional right to challenge executive power “in grave jeopardy,” arguing that it enables government decisions to be made outside parliamentary and public scrutiny, creating what it called “shadow governance.”

SALC’s Melusi Simelane said public-interest organisations and citizens must be able to defend constitutional principles where human rights and the separation of powers are at risk, warning that the ruling leaves those principles unvindicated.

The Eswatini Litigation Centre said the judgment avoided the real issues, arguing that the Constitution — particularly the duty of citizens to defend it — was meant to open the courts to accountability, not close them. Director Mzwandile Masuku said the court had effectively left the Constitution’s promise of oversight in the hands of a gatekeeper who decides who may be heard and who may not.

The Swaziland Rural Women’s Assembly said the case was never just about five individuals, but about whether people in Eswatini have the right to challenge government decisions. Silencing public-interest voices now, the group warned, weakens democracy for everyone tomorrow.

While the kingdom’s football fans have grown weary of the perennial stadium crisis that has forced the national team, Sihlangu Semnikati, to play home games in South Africa, a more quiet and devastating tragedy is unfolding beneath the feet of eSwatini’s athletes. An investigation by Inhlase can reveal systemic failures in project management, oversight, and procurement integrity at the Ministry of Sports, Culture and Youth Affairs and the Microprojects Unit. At the heart of the scandal is the E6.4 million synthetic athletic track at Somhlolo National Stadium—a facility that was meant to usher in a new era for local sprinters but has instead become a symbol of wasted taxpayer funds and shattered sporting ambitions. Since its installation in 2021, the track has not only failed to meet international standards. Still, it has physically disintegrated, leaving the nation’s elite athletes to train on dangerous roadsides or pay exorbitant fees for the only other viable facility in the country.

SOMHLOLO SCANDAL: Unaccredited suppliers cripple eSwatini’s Olympic dreams By INHLASE REPORTER While the kingdom’s football fans have grown weary of the perennial stadium crisis that has forced the national team, Sihlangu Semnikati, to play home games in South Africa, a more quiet and devastating tragedy is unfolding beneath the feet of eSwatini’s athletes. An investig...