-Case of free movement of Community nationals

Analysis

WHEN I read the headline in last Thursday’s Jamaica Observer – ‘US continues mass deportation of immigrants, says rights group’ — I couldn’t help thinking of weak, a position in which CARICOM governments find themselves to make any meaningful intervention on this human rights issue that does require a collective regional response.
Basically, if CARICOM governments have boxed themselves into a difficult position by the contradictory and, at times, quite distasteful actions in dealing fairly with migrants from member states of the Community, then they would have to be quite careful in rushing to make representations—valid as they may be—on behalf of their affected nationals being harassed and, worse, allegedly denied basic rights in the USA.
The CMC news report out of Washington, published in the Observer, quoted the highly reputable Human Rights Watch as disclosing evidence suggesting that US federal immigration officials “continue to impede Caribbean and other immigrants from accessing lawyers, and also extending their time in custody.” Further, despite official assurances, Human Rights Watch says the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency “continues to operate a dysfunctional detention system…”
Well, this is a different problem to the challenges faced in earlier years when the USA first initiated its unilateral policy on ‘criminal deportees’ to the Caribbean region. It led to a tortuous process in negotiations between CARICOM and a Washington administration that required, among other factors, prior consultation with and/or notification of the relevant governments in this region, including basic data on the nationals listed for deportation to their respective countries of origin.
Now, given the ongoing controversies surrounding conflicting attitudes of some regional governments that affect nationals of the community when exercising their right to travel freely within CARICOM, or to take advantage of available opportunities to work in jurisdictions of choice, it would be interesting to learn whether any bilateral or multilateral intervention is likely  by governments to ascertain respect for the legal rights and decent human treatment of Caribbean nationals, who numbered among the current ‘mass deportation of migrants’ by the ICE.
Of course, as is known, governments could expediently turn a blind eye to challenges they prefer to ignore, while opportunistically disagreeing with policies and programmes they once eagerly embraced. As the saying goes: “In party politics, all things are possible.”
The political flip-flops that have resulted in the shocking  implementation deficit that characterizes  the  CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME), are a distressing example of  the  politics of expediency–opportunism if you wish–and particularly so in relation to the ‘freedom of movement of nationals’.

Enter PM Douglas

The latest example of shifting positions would include, surprisingly, the Prime Minister  of St Kitts and Nevis, Dr Denzil Douglas, who will be the Community’s new chairman for the next six months with the hosting in Basseterre next month of this year’s  annual Heads of
Government Conference, scheduled to begin on July 1.
NONE of the participating governments involved with the single economy project has ever considered it necessary to make known an official policy statement that clearly outlines its own position on phased implementation of the first five categories of skilled CARICOM nationals — later extended to ten (among them nurses and teachers) — who would be eligible to live and work in a Community state with relevant contingent rights.
Although the participating countries signed, on July 5, 2001, the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas that provides the legal foundation for the CSME, excuses, apologias, lack of any positive action have been the  norm when it comes to instituting relevant policies and enacting supporting legislation to make  a reality of  Article 46 on  ‘movement of skilled Community nationals’.
Even the wider issue of violations of ‘hassle-free’ intra-regional movement of Caribbean nationals in a number of jurisdictions continue to attract complaints, with a few member states being accused of hostile and even degrading treatment of visiting nationals.
Contrary to what was alluded to in a Barbados ‘Sunday Sun’ article of June 12, titled ‘CSME in hindsight’, “no  government of CARICOM has ever promised what any sensible Community citizen ever seriously expected: The opening of doors to ALL (my emphasis) CARICOM nationals who wish to live in the country  under the original freedom of movement regional plan…”  Truth is, there NEVER was such an agreed policy under what was referenced  in that article as “the original freedom of movement regional plan…”
Rather, in the face of promised initiatives to make the CSME a ‘lived reality’, including freedom of skilled Community nationals,  appropriate professional management of national immigration policies actually fell victim to narrow party politics in some regional jurisdictions (as happened, for instance, in Barbados for the 2008 general election).
There is, therefore, no objective reason why the Prime Minister of St Kitts and Nevis, for example, should now wish to “give Barbados high marks (as reported in the June 12 article),” when it is widely known that party politics was to have a negative impact on the professional functioning of the Barbadian immigration service.
It had frustrated efficient handling of legitimate cases of CARICOM nationals who have been waiting for far too long to secure legal status consistent with the years they have lived in the country and honoured all required state obligations.

Contradiction

Ironically, while Prime Minister Douglas, the incoming new CARICOM chairman, was expediently “giving high marks” to Barbados in his interview with my colleague, Tony Best,  for being upfront in dealing with the ‘thorny’ free movement of nationals issue, he seemed to have missed the lamentation by Prime Minister Freundel Stuart over the country’s controversial  processing of CARICOM migrants who have worked for many years in Barbados and paid their taxes, but are now hampered (said Stuart) “by the strict enforcement of  a long-existing policy” to access health care to which they are entitled.
Question of relevance, therefore, is: What precisely does Prime Minister Douglas now find commendable to emulate in the Barbadian experience in dealing with CARICOM nationals to rationalise his own domestic approach to what remains a massive failure by regional governments  to seriously tackle a core problem in the creation of a seamless regional economy—namely, the much publicised people-focused project of hassle-free  movement for Community nationals and phased implementation of identified categories of skilled  nationals to live and work in any participating member state?
Barbados is not known to be among the few CARICOM countries implementing the decision by CARICOM Heads of Government to grant an automatic six-month stay on arrival (if required) for Community nationals, irrespective of country of origin. I do not know if this situation currently also applies to Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago or St. Kitts and Nevis. I am aware that Guyana and St. Vincent and the Grenadines are among the ‘implementing’ states.
And, as far as I am aware, NO government of the Community has provided the public with even preliminary data on the number of legal or suspected illegal CARICOM migrants in their respective jurisdictions. Or, by extension, the estimated cost to the national treasury when such non-nationals access health care or any other facilities intended ONLY for citizens of those jurisdictions.
However, in the working document on ‘Re-energising CARICOM Integration’ that outgoing Community chairman, Prime Minister Tillman Thomas of Grenada, circulated to all Heads of Government for last month’s ‘special retreat’ in Guyana, one of the listed areas recommended for an ‘Immediate Action Plan’ is  movement of nationals.
The intention, as stated, is “to ensure that the existing agreed 10 categories of free movement of skilled Community nationals work efficiently, smoothly and seamlessly across all member states, in particular, a single Certificate of Skills Recognition should be accepted throughout the region…”
The public would be interested to know how many governments have actually completed implementation arrangements to accommodate even half of the 10 categories of skilled Community nationals. Will we learn of anything new on this and related issues from next month’s four-day CARICOM Summit in St. Kitts and Nevis?