JUBA – A civil society activist has raised concerns about a potential violation of South Sudan’s sovereignty after a U.S. judge authorized the deportation of eight undocumented immigrants with criminal records to the country, Thursday, June 27.
The ruling follows a U.S. Supreme Court decision permitting the Trump administration to deport the individuals, overturning a lower court order that sought to block their removal.
Ter Manyang Gatwech, executive director of the Center for Peace and Advocacy, criticized the decision, saying it undermines South Sudan’s sovereignty and violates international legal norms.
“This decision raises serious concerns about the violation of South Sudan’s sovereignty and the principles of international law,” Manyang said. “South Sudan, as a sovereign nation, should not be a recipient of individuals without proper legal and diplomatic coordination.”
Manyang argued that returning individuals to South Sudan without prior consultation breaches international cooperation standards and could compromise the country’s judicial system.
He called on the U.S. government to clarify the legal basis for the deportation and urged South Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation to seek an official explanation.
“The CPA strongly urges the Government of South Sudan to immediately request clarification from the United States regarding the legal rationale behind this ruling,” he said.
He added that diplomatic communication is essential to safeguard South Sudan’s international rights.
“We call on both the United States and South Sudan to resolve this matter through appropriate diplomatic channels and in line with international human rights standards and mutual respect.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation has not yet commented.
The Supreme Court ruling paves the way for the deportation of the eight migrants, who had been held for weeks in a cargo container at a U.S. military base in Djibouti while awaiting the outcome.
U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy previously ruled that deportations to third countries—not the migrants’ countries of origin—require additional due process. Based on that, he had ordered a halt to their removal.
However, the high court invalidated that order.
“Our June 23 order stayed the April 18 preliminary injunction in full. The May 21 remedial order cannot now be used to enforce an injunction that our stay rendered unenforceable,” the justices wrote in an unsigned opinion.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented, accusing the court of catering to the Trump administration.
“Today’s order clarifies only one thing: Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial,” Sotomayor wrote.
She warned that the deportations could lead to severe human rights violations.
“What the government wants to do, concretely, is send the eight noncitizens it illegally removed from the United States from Djibouti to South Sudan, where they will be turned over to the local authorities without regard for the likelihood that they will face torture or death,” she said.
