Mozambique Deports 13 Nigerians Without Charges While 29 Others Remain Detained In Maputo

Outrage Grows As Mozambique Deports 13 Nigerians Without Charges While 29 Others Remain Detained In Maputo

A diplomatic row is intensifying between Nigeria and Mozambique after 13 Nigerians were deported without formal charges while 29 others remained in detention in Maputo, the Mozambican capital, according to the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission, which described the treatment of the detainees as unfair and raised concerns about due process. The case has now moved beyond a routine immigration issue and into a broader dispute touching on legality, consular protection and possible xenophobic targeting. 

The core facts now publicly established are these: 42 Nigerians were initially detained by Mozambican authorities; 13 of them were later deported to Nigeria; and 29 were still being held as of the latest NiDCOM-backed reports on Friday. The deported group arrived in Lagos and were received at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport by officials acting on behalf of NiDCOM Chair Abike Dabiri-Erewa. Public reporting tied to NiDCOM said the returnees were deported without any known formal charges.

The arrests appear to have begun on February 28 at a spare-parts market in Maputo, where Nigerian traders were reportedly picked up by Mozambican authorities. That detail is important because several reports say the detainees were arrested specifically at their workplaces, not in the course of a criminal prosecution already underway. NiDCOM’s position, as reflected in multiple reports, is that the Nigerians were singled out from among others at the market and that no clear offence was initially communicated to them.

Mozambican authorities were reported to have justified the action on documentation grounds, saying the Nigerians lacked proper immigration papers. But that explanation is now at the center of the dispute because NiDCOM and the deportees say most of those affected actually had valid residence and travel documents. Guardian reported that only one of the deported Nigerians was said to have had an expired visa, and that it lapsed just a day before deportation. If accurate, that weakens the broad justification that the group was simply undocumented.

NiDCOM’s public language has been unusually strong. Abike Dabiri-Erewa condemned the arrest of the 42 Nigerians without any offence being levelled against them and called for the immediate release of the remaining detainees or, alternatively, their arraignment in line with due process. She also suggested that the selective arrest of Nigerians alone pointed to a possible xenophobic pattern rather than a neutral immigration sweep. That framing has elevated the incident from a consular matter into a politically sensitive accusation about discriminatory enforcement. 

The condition of the detainees has also become part of the controversy. Business Insider’s report on the earlier stage of the crisis said NiDCOM alleged that some detainees had been subjected to abuse, illness and theft while in custody. Those claims remain serious but should be treated carefully, because the publicly available reporting largely attributes them to NiDCOM rather than an independent judicial finding. Still, their inclusion helps explain why Nigerian officials and diaspora representatives have reacted so strongly. 

The diplomatic and legal situation became even more contentious with reports that Mozambican authorities proceeded with deportations despite a court order. Punch reported that local media in Mozambique said a court had ordered the release of the 42 Nigerians, citing rights violations, but that authorities later rearrested them and began deporting them in batches. According to that report, 13 were deported first and another 18 later left early Thursday morning, bringing the number already deported to 31. That later update, if sustained, would mean the situation is moving quickly and that the earlier figure of 29 still detained may already have changed. Because these updates are developing rapidly, the exact current detention count should be treated as fluid. 

That timing issue is one of the most important details surrounding the story. The widely circulated account that “13 have been deported and 29 remain detained” was accurate in the NiDCOM-linked Friday reporting. But a later Punch report suggested mass deportation had continued after that, reducing the number still in custody. The discrepancy does not necessarily mean either report is false; it more likely reflects events unfolding in stages over hours. 

Another key figure in the story is Uchenna Nwafor, identified by Punch as president of the Nigerians in Diaspora Organisation in Mozambique. He said the deportations came in waves and described the ordeal as difficult for the victims. His account supports the view that what began as detention may now be turning into a broader expulsion exercise directed at the remaining Nigerians. 

What remains unclear is whether Mozambique has issued a full official public explanation detailing the legal basis for the original arrests, the continued detention, the alleged disregard of a release order, and the deportations. In the reporting currently available, the Mozambican side is mostly represented through claims about documentation problems. There is not yet a widely cited detailed official statement from Mozambican authorities laying out the specific offences, evidence or procedural steps taken against each detainee. That gap is central to why the case has triggered outrage. 

The case now has at least four major dimensions. First is the legality of the original arrest. Second is the legality of the continued detention without charge. Third is whether the deportations complied with Mozambican law and international norms of due process. Fourth is the political allegation that only Nigerians were targeted at the market, suggesting discriminatory profiling. NiDCOM has clearly leaned into that fourth point, and that is why this story is becoming a test of bilateral diplomacy, not just migration control.

For now, the most solidly verified position is that 42 Nigerians were detained, 13 were deported without known charges, NiDCOM condemned the action as unfair and due-process deficient, and later reporting indicates the deportations may already have expanded beyond the first 13. The next critical question is whether Nigeria’s foreign ministry secures either the release of the remaining detainees or a transparent legal explanation from Mozambique. 

📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews

Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Jevaun Rhashan