US Deportees Take Legal Action Against Ghana Over ‘Unlawful’ Detention

A group of eleven individuals deported from the United States and subsequently detained in Ghana have filed a lawsuit against the Ghanaian government, their lawyer has revealed.

Legal representative Oliver-Barker Vormawor argued that the deportees had not broken any Ghanaian law and that keeping them in custody at a military facility amounts to an illegal detention. He has asked the authorities to present them before a court and explain the justification for their confinement.

While the government is yet to respond to the case, it has earlier indicated plans to receive another 40 deportees. Opposition lawmakers, however, are calling for a suspension of the arrangement, insisting parliamentary approval is required before such a deal can be enforced under Ghanaian law.

Just last week, President John Mahama announced that 14 West Africans had arrived under an agreement with Washington. He claimed they had all been returned to their home countries, but Foreign Minister Samuel Okudzeto Ablakwa offered a conflicting account, saying only most had been sent back.

Court filings submitted by Vormawor counter both accounts, stating that 11 deportees remain in custody. The documents allege that the group was first held in a US detention center, shackled, and then flown to Ghana aboard a military cargo plane.

The deportations come amid President Donald Trump’s intensified immigration crackdown, under which his administration has pledged unprecedented levels of removals of undocumented migrants.

Commenting on the issue earlier, Ghana’s Foreign Minister stressed that the country’s decision to take in deportees was rooted in compassion: “This should not be misconstrued as an endorsement of the immigration policies of the Trump administration,” he told reporters, citing “humanitarian principle and pan-African empathy.”

Meanwhile, five of those affected—including three Nigerians and two Gambians—have also initiated legal action against the US government. They argue that a court order protected them from removal and that their deportation should never have taken place.