Kilmar Abrego Garcia attends an event with supporters as he arrives for a check-in at the ICE field office in Baltimore, Maryland, on August 25, 2025. Credit: Elizabeth Frantz/Reuters/File
As reported by CNN
The heads of three African countries – Uganda, Eswatini, and Ghana – said they would not allow Kilmar Abrego García to be deported to their territory. Such positions could affect the U.S. administration’s plans regarding his detention in the current case.
The three countries’ positions are appearing at different stages of the process: two refusals were voiced during a hearing in the Maryland state court on Friday, when a senior ICE official disclosed some details of the case. This could prompt the federal judge to rule on a temporary release of García from immigration detention, if the judge becomes convinced that deportation is not imminent.
Note that the governments of Uganda, Eswatini, and Ghana previously stated that they would not accept Abrego García, who was allegedly illegally deported to El Salvador at the end of March and later returned to the United States to face charges of human trafficking. The United States issued an order in 2019 prohibiting sending García to El Salvador because of the threat from the gang, which explains the inconsistency of the latest positions of the countries regarding his acceptance.
Judge Paula Xinis of the U.S. District Court for Maryland on Friday did not rule on García’s request for release from immigration detention in Pennsylvania, where he is being held. However, during the lengthy hearing she did not always seem convinced that the government has a compelling basis to keep him in detention.
These hearings formed part of Abrego García’s ongoing attempt to seek court intervention in his immigration case to halt, in his view, improper government pressure on the process. In Nashville, other defense lawyers have turned to a federal court to determine how much they can access the government’s internal actions and consider the possibility of dismissing charges if, from their perspective, the prosecution was improper.
«How has this changed from Uganda to Eswatini?»
During the hearings, questions regarding Abrego García’s rights violations during arrest were discussed, in particular regarding Miranda rights advisement and further steps by the defense to prevent the testimony from being discredited.
«I understand that Uganda ultimately said „no“»
It is also known that the United States had considered deportation to Eswatini, but to date the country has refused to take García; talks between the parties are ongoing.
«Three warnings – and you’re out of the game»
During the hearings, prosecutors’ steps toward potentially dropping charges and the exchange of information between agencies in cases related to the possible re-deportation of Abrego García were discussed.
You may be interested in these materials:
- Federal judge suggests immigration charges against Kilmar Abrego Garcia may be retaliatory, opening new legal proceedings to examine DOJ motives in Tennessee.
- The ICC in The Hague presents evidence against fugitive Ugandan rebel leader Joseph Kony in a historic in absentia hearing, highlighting decades of war crimes and atrocities committed by the Lord’s Resistance Army.
- US deportations to Eswatini spark outrage over security and human rights concerns amid secretive agreements and regional tensions.
