Mbabane– The State has denied defying High Court orders in the case involving 25 foreign nationals, saying their departure from Eswatini was halted after immigration officials discovered that dozens of passports presented at the country’s border posts were invalid, revoked or otherwise unsuitable for international travel.
The explanation is contained in an answering affidavit filed before the High Court by Officer Commanding Organised Crime D/Asst Supt Bhekani Shiba on behalf of the National Commissioner of Police and the other respondents.
The affidavit is the State’s response to an urgent application by the foreign nationals, led by Li Hai, who accuse the police of unlawfully re-arresting them after they had been released from Sidvwashini Correctional Facility under High Court orders allowing them to leave the country.
According to the respondents, the Government fully complied with court orders issued on July 1 and July 22 by facilitating the applicants’ release. Acting Minister for Home Affairs Owen Nxumalo subsequently issued liberation warrants and the group was released on July 25 to travel through the Ngwenya and Mhlumeni border posts.
However, the State says the situation changed when immigration officials conducted electronic and manual checks on the applicants’ passports at the ports of exit.
The respondents allege that 15 passports presented at Mhlumeni Border Post and another 14 at Ngwenya Border Post were flagged as invalid, revoked or legally unusable for international travel.
According to the affidavit, immigration authorities had no legal basis to clear the applicants for departure because neighbouring countries could not be expected to admit travellers carrying invalid documents.
The State further alleges that the passport holders were escorted to the Mozambican side for verification, where immigration officials there reportedly reached the same conclusion. It also claims that the Mozambican Ambassador informed the Eswatini Government that the applicants would not be admitted into Mozambique.
The respondents state that police were left with no option but to detain the applicants while investigations into the travel documents continued.
The affidavit also states that another 10 applicants were intercepted while travelling towards the border after police investigations linked them to the same matter.
The State rejects the applicants’ claim that they are being prosecuted twice for the same offences. It argues that the earlier criminal case related to unlawful entry into Eswatini and working without permits under the Immigration Act, while the current investigation concerns the alleged use of invalid or fraudulent passports and the absence of lawful travel documentation required for cross-border travel.
For that reason, the respondents argue that the constitutional protection against double jeopardy does not apply.
The State also disputes allegations that it is in contempt of court, saying it complied with the High Court’s directives by releasing the applicants from correctional custody and issuing the required liberation warrants.
According to the respondents, the applicants’ departure became impossible because of circumstances that only emerged at the border, namely the alleged invalidity of their passports and the lack of visas required for transit into neighbouring countries.
The affidavit states that the Government has since engaged the Embassy of the People’s Republic of China, which has indicated its willingness to assist with replacement travel documents and arrangements for the applicants’ return to China.
The respondents have asked the High Court to dismiss the urgent application, rule that the applicants’ detention does not amount to contempt of court or double jeopardy, and extend the period within which they may leave Eswatini once valid travel documentation has been secured.
Discussion about this post