Dear Editor,
We the undersigned call on the Government of Guyana to urgently clarify the status of the 26 Haitian women, children and men who reportedly entered Guyana legally from Barbados in early November and were granted up to six months’ stay in the country by Immigration. According to media reports, they were taken into custody the very next day, and are described as being either in ‘protective custody’ or ‘detained’, with ‘the Government claiming that they might be victims of human trafficking,’ and that they might be sent back to Haiti.
Guyana’s law on trafficking in Persons and the Palermo Protocol to which Guyana adheres is very clear that trafficking in persons is an offence against the victim/survivor of trafficking; in other words they should never be detained or charged for being a victim or survivor of trafficking as to do so would be a case of re-victimization and a violation of Guyanese and international law. We note that the Haitians currently in custody have reportedly insisted that they were not victims of trafficking, and that they have not broken any laws.
We note that in January 2019, an Executive Order amended the Immigration Act to include Haiti under the schedule of countries that benefit from 6 months visa free stay in Guyana.
We call on the Government of Guyana to clarify whether, as the media reports, the Haitians currently in ‘protective custody’ entered the country legally under the freedom of movement provisions of Caricom’s Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. If they did, and have the six-month stamp in their passport, then by detaining them and removing them from Guyana, the Government is violating its treaty obligations under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, as stipulated by the 2013 ruling of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the case brought by Jamaican national Shanique Myrie against the Government of Barbados. In that landmark decision, the CCJ ruled that Caricom nationals have the right to enter any Member State and stay there for up to six months, “subject to the rights of Member States to refuse undesirable persons entry and to prevent persons from becoming a charge on public funds.” Subsequent misconduct – such as breaching the terms of the entry permit or working without a permit – may render someone who enters lawfully liable to deportation. However, any purported reason for removal must be provided for by law and the process of doing so should adhere to the standard requirements of due process, including access to the courts.
The CCJ decision also “requires Member States promptly and in writing to inform a Community national refused entry not only of the reasons for the refusal but also of his or her right to challenge that decision.” This includes recognition of the legal entitlement of community nationals “to consult an attorney or a consular official of their country, if available, or in any event to contact a family member.”
If the Haitian children, women and men currently detained have a six-month stamp in their passport, as the press has reported, then it means that the Immigration department had the opportunity to invoke the circumstances discussed in the Myrie case to refuse entry but saw no reason to take such action. And from the reports, they have been detained for some three weeks so far. Have they been charged? Is this not a violation according to our Constitution, in that someone – in this case, 26 Haitian children, women and men – cannot be held for more than 72 hours unless brought before a court to be charged?
We wish to register our special concern for the Haitian children who have been separated from their adult compatriots. These children are undoubtedly being traumatized by this action as they are unable to communicate their needs and feelings effectively in English. Reuniting these children with their parents or guardians should be the utmost priority.
This distressing situation that has been reported on in the media, has prompted this request for the Government of Guyana to provide urgent clarification.
Those of us who are Guyanese can well remember the discrimination and harassment that up to very recently many of our fellow Guyanese endured at airports around the region. We of all people should be sensitive to the negative stereotyping of Guyanese as cheats, as criminals and as unwanted burdens who would drag down other countries. As such we should be doubly sensitive to not impose similar stereotyping of our fellow sisters and brothers of Haitian origin, to whose forebears we owe a mighty debt of revolutionary inspiration. Our foreign policy must not only favour the rich and powerful but must also be humane and non-discriminatory as regards ethnicity, geography, social status and genders. We are each other’s keepers and should treat others the way we would like to be treated.
Yours faithfully,
Danuta Radzik
Josephine Whitehead
Raquel Thomas
Michelle Kalamandeen
Akola Thompson
Lisa Edwards
Nicole Cole
Renata Chuck-A-Sang
Janette Bulkan
Joan McDonald
Vanda Radzik
Ayo Dalgety-Dean
Sherlina Nageer
Sumintra Narine
Mark Mc. Gowan
Akeem Henry
Duane Edwards
Medino Abraham
Keith Branch
Rupert Roopnaraine
Elton Mc.Rae
Charlene Wilkinson
Alissa Trotz
Derwayne Wills
Alexis Goffe, Jamaica/USA
Mosa Telford
Dr Pauline Bullen
Andrew Campbell
Kamala Kempadoo
Vidyaratha Kissoon
Karen de Souza
Salima Bacchus-Hinds
Mellissa Ifill
Sunita Samaroo
Ato Rockcliffe
Omattie Madray
Jocelyn Dow
Norwell Hinds
Susan Collymore
Anna Iles
Rev Patricia Sheerattan-Bisnauth
Nan Peacocke
Nesha Haniff
Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc.
(TIGI)
Shellon Boyce
Halima Khan
Alim Hosein
Red Thread
SASOD
Meshach Pierre
Arianne Harris
Joy Marcus
Donald Rodney
Chelsea Fung Kalsatos
Alicia Roopnaraine
Mark Jacobs
Diana Swan-Lawrence
Karen Van Sluytman-Corbin
Cheryl Sampson, Chair, For Women &
Gender Equality Commission
Doreen Gaura on behalf of Just Detention
International-South Africa
Diana Mahabir Wyatt, Chairperson,
Caribbean Centre for Human Rights,
Trinidad and Tobago
Maria Carla Gullotta, Executive Director
Stand up for Jamaica, Jamaica