JFJ flags refoulement risks In deportee deal
Loading article...
Jamaica could jeopardise its international legal obligations and longstanding commitment to human rights by serving as a transit hub for third-country nationals (TCNs) being deported from the United States, human rights group Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) has warned.
In a statement released yesterday, JFJ said its primary concern was the risk of refoulement and chain refoulement, which is the act of forcing someone to a place where they are not safe.
It noted that, as a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, Jamaica has a binding duty not to facilitate the transfer or holding of individuals who face persecution or torture.
The JFJ said many of these TCNs already hold US filings of ‘withholding of removal’ or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), confirming they cannot safely return home.
“Inadequate independent screening upon arrival could place Jamaica in violation of these core obligations,” the statement said.
Once individuals land on Jamaican soil, the country assumes primary legal custody and responsibility under international law and principles of sovereignty, it noted.
“The US largely relinquishes control at that point,” said Mickel Jackson, executive director of JFJ.
“If onward removal fails, because home countries refuse entry, assessment indicates high risk on return or logistical delays occur, people could be trapped in Jamaica indefinitely. Past experiences in Eswatini, Panama and Costa Rica show how quickly ‘temporary transit’ can become prolonged limbo, with serious accountability gaps.”
Further, the JFJ said the agreement raises serious constitutional questions regarding the legal status, treatment and detention of the individuals while they remain in Jamaica.
It noted that Jamaica's Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms protects everyone within its jurisdiction and, as such, “the legal basis on which any restriction of TCNs' liberty would rest—engaging important rights protected under the Charter—warrants careful consideration”.
The JFJ said some TCNs being deported from the US under the Donald Trump administration, are non-criminal individuals with final US removal orders who cannot be returned directly home due to diplomatic barriers, country instability, or valid protection claims.
It noted many are long-term US residents with deep family ties, including US-citizen spouses and children, jobs, and community roots, but without permanent legal status.
The JFJ added that many hold asylum-related protection based on fears of persecution linked to political opinion or membership in a particular social group, including LGBTQ+ status.
“Returning them, even indirectly through third-country transit, could expose them to severe harm, imprisonment, or violence in their countries of origin. Real-world precedents illustrate the dangers,” the group said.
Further, it stated that post-Hurricane Melissa resource strains heighten risks of inadequate medical care, family separation, and re-traumatisation, particularly for LGBTQ+ persons and other vulnerable groups.
The human rights lobby called for clear protocols on holding conditions and stated that where the TRNs will be housed, maximum duration, and independent monitoring are therefore critical.
Asked yesterday whether the administration of Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness believes Jamaica does not have a human rights problem, Information Minister Senator Dr Dana Morris Dixon said the protection of human rights is a “guiding principle” of the Jamaican Government.
“I believe this administration deeply, deeply believes in human rights and I think we've been operating under that premise as an administration,” she told journalists during a post-Cabinet press briefing at Jamaica House.
Further, JFJ also questioned whether Jamaica was prepared to fully process any asylum or protection claims the TRNs might raise while in the country.
National Security Minister Dr Horace Chang, who is also the deputy prime minister, said during the press briefing that Jamaica would facilitate those who wish to seek asylum.
“If they choose to stay then we have to deal with it differently. Well, not differently. If they choose to stay then they will have to apply to our courts for asylum status and if they get asylum status we retain them. If they don’t, we send them home. At that time we’ll have to send them home at our cost,” he said.
In the meantime, pointing to the protections in the agreement outlined by the Government, which include the transfer of non-criminals only, strictly temporary stays, and Jamaica’s right to refuse arrivals, JFJ argued that such assurances were “insufficient without robust, transparent, and independently verifiable safeguards”.
The organisation urged the Government to immediately release the full memorandum of understanding and operational procedures for public and parliamentary review, implement Jamaican non-refoulement screenings utilising qualified interpreters, legal representation, and the 2009 National Refugee Policy, and require 48–72 hours of advance notice in the individual's language before any transfer takes place.
The group also wants the establishment of clear custody handover guidelines and a strict maximum holding period with explicit fallback plans if onward flights stall, and the inclusion of strong rejection criteria as well as an exit clause should human rights or operational problems arise.