Paperwork is contagious

Let's start with our first story.

I mean, this is a trend that we're seeing where the U.S. is having agreements with African nations and are deporting...

I mean, what is interesting is that they are not only...

They are not deporting... citizens of those countries in court so it's not a majority if they are in those cases but a majority are deportations of foreigners who are illegal migrants in the u.s i mean classified as illegal miners and illegal immigrants in the u.s now they are taken to other African nations, most of the time they don't even, I mean, they don't have a relationship with these African nations.

Why is the US not even deporting them to their own homeland, but rather has now seen Africa as a host for people that they do not want? I mean, it is a sad reality, but what is your thoughts on this? And do you think that Ivory Coast stand should be the standard of all African countries? Or do you think that African countries should embrace this? Because I mean, this is one way to one, build your, a good relationship with the US, kind of find an incentive or kind of benefits, monetary, if I might add, that you can get from the US and, you know, have an impact in your own society.

But most critical is, even if nations decide to do this, what can they do to ensure that the people who are coming into their country are not going to be like in quote unquote, bad eggs.

They're not going to cause worse troubles for the nation.

How are they going to integrate them into their society? But overall, I know it's a mouthful of questions, but overall, what's your thoughts on this policy? Should it stop? Or do you think it's midway, accept and then benefit?

I think I'll try to articulate this using about, I'll do it maybe in five points.

I think the first thing to kick off with is the concept of sovereignty and responsibility.

As long as you're a country, you have the responsibility of taking care of your own nationals, regardless of what has happened.

So if you are returning someone from a country and the person is a national of your country, I think common sense and then the fundamental premise around law requires you to be responsible for your citizen, meaning that you take them in.

So that raises a big question.

Why is the U.S. struggling to deport people to their own countries mainly because number one majority of these people are not documented and so the US cannot really pinpoint to say this is the country they come from And that's the core thing.

And so if somebody comes into a country, say for the US, you don't know the nationality of the person, you don't know where.

So essentially the person is stateless in terms of documentation.

So what do you do? So if you look closely at the UNHCR position, I think it talks about the responsibility for somebody in that kind of mode, whether you like it or not.

fall on that state where that person has stayed.

Meaning that essentially, the responsibility of ensuring that that person continues to live falls on the U.S. Now, to your first question, can the U.S. actually move people from their country, the people they are responsible for, to a third country, to a third-party country? They can, but they need to agree.

And if you look closely at the rules and laws, I will call it the rules governing, the principles governing some of those things is for those agreements that you are having with the third country to be clear, to be transparent, so that people can interrogate it.

If you look at the African Union, I think in 2015, they did call that those agreements should even be made public.

And then it should be reviewable.

That means anybody in York, because you're bringing in people, for instance, you can go and bring in gangs of criminals, drug lords, and then you flood them into your countries and then they destroy your country.

And so you don't want to be, you're just moving in terrorists when your state do not have capacity.

To protect yourself.