Trump, Bukele and the Criminalisation of Migrants: A Human Rights Violation Disguised as Crime-Fighting
Under the pretext of fighting the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua, Donald Trump invokes an 18th-century law to deport thousands of migrants. Over 5,000 Venezuelans have been expelled within weeks, often without any evidence linking them to the criminal organisation. Many have been directly sent to Bukele’s megaprison, where they are detained under inhumane conditions, crammed by the thousands into overcrowded cells and denied any legal assistance. Behind this brutal policy lies a hidden business deal with Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.
Tren de Aragua: A Pretext Exaggerated by the Trump Administration
In February 2025, the Trump administration classified Tren de Aragua, a notorious Venezuelan gang operating in Latin America, as a foreign terrorist organisation. This designation allowed Trump to invoke the Alien Enemies Act, a rarely used 1798 law. The result? Thousands of Venezuelans were arrested and deported in haste, including asylum seekers with no ties to the gang. While Tren de Aragua is indeed involved in criminal activities across Latin America, its presence in the United States remains limited and largely overstated by the Trump administration. No substantial evidence justifies its classification as a major terrorist threat within the U.S. A report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) states that the gang’s impact in the U.S. is minimal compared to Mexican cartels and existing criminal networks. Meanwhile, the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA) condemns the political manipulation aimed at justifying ultra-repressive immigration policies.
Mass Expulsions and Human Rights Violations
Images of tattooed migrants, handcuffed and forcibly sent to El Salvador’s detention centres, have caused outrage. Venezuelan families have recognised relatives among the deportees, denouncing a judicial slaughterhouse where the presumption of innocence no longer applies. Disturbing testimonies reveal that mere physical features—a tattoo, a certain hairstyle, or even a pierced ear—were enough to be arrested and put on a one-way flight. A U.S. federal judge attempted to halt these deportations, ruling the process arbitrary and unconstitutional. However, the White House ignored the court order, claiming that flights were already in progress at the time of the ruling—an authoritarian manoeuvre with severe consequences.
The Hidden Business Between Trump and Bukele
But why send these detainees to El Salvador, a country already struggling with overflowing prisons? The answer lies in the dubious relationship between Trump and Nayib Bukele, the Salvadoran president who has turned mass incarceration into a political tool. Since transforming his country into a prison state, Bukele has courted the favour of authoritarian-leaning governments—the U.S. included. Investigations reveal that the U.S. is paying significant sumsto incarcerate these so-called criminals in Bukele’s massive penitentiaries, particularly the infamous “megaprison”, which holds 40,000 inmates. In other words, the Trump administration is outsourcing its repression to El Salvador, turning the war on crime into a profitable business for Bukele. Sources close to the Salvadoran government estimate that Washington has paid over $50 million in contracts to detain migrants in Bukele’s prisons, further strengthening his ultra-repressive carceral model. This financial windfall fuels a system where detainees endure extreme conditions, serving as political props for the Salvadoran president.
An Authoritarian Drift Disguised as Security Policy
These mass expulsions reflect a deeply authoritarian and populist vision of justice—where migrants are criminalised to appease a radicalised electorate. Far from being a genuine effort to combat organised crime, this manoeuvre allows Trump to cater to anti-immigration hardliners while forging a dangerous alliance with Bukele. The United Nations and multiple human rights organisations denounce this as a blatant violation of fundamental rights. In an official statement, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) expressed concern over “mass deportations carried out without legal safeguards”, warning that “the criminalisation of migrants without tangible evidence violates international human rights conventions.” This raises a fundamental question: How far will they go before the international community takes action..?
G.S.
