Asylum: Washington has closed 2,700 cases by designating Uganda, which has only received eight people

The United States has closed more than 2,700 asylum procedures without examining the merits of the claims, by designating Uganda as the intended destination country, even though only eight people have actually been transferred there to date. This is the finding of a Human Rights Watch (HRW) report published on October 8, 2026, which RFI reported on October 10, 2026.

The agreement between Washington and Kampala was concluded in July 2025. It allows the United States to send people to Uganda, where they could then seek protection. Since January 2025, more than 2,700 cases have been closed on this basis, according to the organization.

Nearly 700 Guineans, 500 Senegalese

The individuals concerned are mostly African: approximately 700 Guineans, 500 Senegalese, more than 400 Mauritanians, and 285 Cameroonians, according to HRW's count. Their fate remains uncertain. Their asylum claims were not examined on their merits, and almost none of them were sent to Uganda either.

"Denying their right to asylum"

Michael Garcia Bochenek, one of the report's authors, points out that U.S. law allows anyone present on U.S. soil to file an asylum claim. According to him, the executive branch is trying to impose the opposite rule, where an agreement concluded with a third country would be enough to dismiss this right: this amounts to "using the agreement to deny their right to asylum," he told RFI.

The researcher questions the gap between the 2,700 closed cases and the eight transfers carried out. He doubts that Uganda can or wants to host these people and wonders if this approach is a "form of magical thinking" or if it hides another objective.

Agreements that also involve African capitals

The HRW report calls into question the policy of expulsions to African countries implemented by the Trump administration. For the Guinean, Senegalese, Mauritanian, or Cameroonian nationals targeted, the issue is not primarily a transfer that does not take place: it is the loss of the examination of their case, in the name of a country to which they are not sent.

This mechanism places the signatory African states before a question of responsibility. By agreeing to appear as a destination on paper, they provide the legal argument that allows asylum procedures to be closed thousands of kilometers away from them, without their own nationals, or those of their neighbors, gaining any protection.