A controversial agreement between Uganda and the United States to accept deportees is drawing significant scrutiny, particularly in the case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, an El Salvadoran national residing in Maryland. Garcia, who surrendered to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on August 25, 2025, faces potential deportation to Uganda, a nation with no apparent ties to him.
The U.S.-Uganda accord, reportedly stipulating that only deportees without criminal records and who are not unaccompanied minors will be accepted, has been criticized for its lack of transparency. Concerns are amplified by the absence of a reasonable fear interview for Garcia, whose legal team argues that the human smuggling charges against him are unfounded and retaliatory. Garcia was previously deported to El Salvador in March 2025, despite a court order protecting him due to potential harm in his home country. His lawyers claim he endured severe beatings and psychological torture in an El Salvadoran prison following this erroneous deportation. He was returned to the U.S. in June 2025 to face human smuggling charges, to which he has pleaded not guilty. The Trump administration has maintained that Garcia is a danger to the community and an MS-13 gang member, allegations he and his legal team vehemently deny. Federal judges in 2025 have questioned the government's evidence regarding his alleged gang membership.
Critics within Uganda have voiced concerns about the agreement's lack of parliamentary oversight, suggesting it may serve political or economic interests. Opposition leader Mathias Mpuuga stated that without parliamentary oversight, "the whole scheme stinks." Human rights organizations and international observers have also raised alarms about the safety and due process rights of individuals transferred under such agreements. UN human rights experts have warned that these arrangements can lead to people being stranded, arbitrarily detained, and at risk of torture or other inhuman treatment, urging the U.S. government to ensure effective access to legal assistance and judicial oversight.
The U.S. government has been actively pursuing similar deportation agreements with various countries globally, citing the need to manage immigration flows and address national security concerns. However, these "third-country agreements" have been met with legal challenges and widespread criticism from advocacy groups who point to potential human rights violations and the circumvention of due process. The administration's justification for these agreements often centers on strained diplomatic relations or other reasons that impede direct deportation to a migrant's home country. The case of Kilmar Abrego Garcia has become a focal point, highlighting the complex ethical, legal, and humanitarian dimensions of these international immigration arrangements.