ON Wednesday this newspaper carried an article from Barbados Today which dealt with a story about a Guyanese being deported from the island for stealing corned beef. This story generated heated discussions and debates by the man in the street and on social media.There were varying views, inclusive of mockery, outrage, calls for Guyana to exit the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and the view held that the body has not delivered. What these conversations are communicating to the nation is that Guyanese are opinionated and can form cleavages when they feel threatened. Both approaches are encouraging. The former exemplified a characteristic as a people to be vocal on matters considered important and the latter is testimony of our collective identity, which is good for nation-building and preservation of our sovereignty, especially given the contention surrounding two of our borders.
That having been said, CARICOM serves an important role in the region. This body helps to cement a regional identity, advances the developmental causes of the region’s peoples, and presents a unitary front on the global stage. Small-state societies such as ours stand to gain more as a united force. When CARICOM was established in 1973, it was founded on the principle of harnessing the resources of the region — human, natural, capital and entrepreneurship — for the development of the peoples and the region. This requires will and commitment by the leaders, on behalf of the peoples, to bring the aspirations to fruition.
Forging the culture of togetherness does not operate without regard to established principles, such as laws and the values by which an individual society governs and manages its affairs. Collective associations, such as CARICOM, operate on the basis of collective values adumbrated in instruments such as treaties, charters and agendas. These instruments bind the body together and are what members and participants are held to account by. In the area of free movement, be it in skills or travel, such is governed by a country’s indigenous guidelines, with an eye not to operate inconsistent with commonly agreed principles on the skills allowed the freedom to move and respect for the arriving country’s immigration laws, which both emigrating and immigrating countries have corresponding responsibility to ensure and safeguard.
Free movement does not carry any automatic guarantee or immunity that the laws of a host country can be violated. Even in instance where this happens, as in the case of Guyana during 2008/2009 when Barbados was deporting and threatening to deport Guyanese who were not residing legally or taking the necessary steps to do so within the amnesty period, the Government of Guyana took offence to a country moving to regularise the status of Guyanese consistent with its laws. It is not unusual to Caribbean lived experiences to hear people cry foul and defer to the emotive to form opinions, one way of the other, in abstention of prevailing principles such as laws and charters. And this is something the peoples and leaders of the region may need to address in building relations among countries, which can temper perceptions and avoid stereotypes. Guyana can take leadership in the regard where there is acceptance that the laws of Caribbean host countries ought to be respected, equally as the laws of Guyana and that of other countries visited or resided in.
Law and order is vital to maintaining an orderly environment and planning for population growth as part of a developmental agenda. These factors are important given the consequences they carry to social services, crime and stability of a society. In the case of the Guyanese being deported after pleading guilty to the theft, it is advised that this person has been living on the island illegally for 11 years. For Guyanese, if CARICOM is to realise its true potential to develop the region for the people’s benefit, Guyana too has to look at shouldering its responsibilities in this regard.
For some time now this country has not been generating as a matter of priority, employment, economic and equal opportunities for its citizens. The population of the working poor is swelling and in this demographic there are skilled artisans, nurses, teachers, university and college graduates and so forth. Where the Government of Guyana for years felt comfortable not engaging in a national development strategy for its people, contented on relying on remittances, or forced migration, the situation that Guyana found itself in 2008/2009 with the Government of Barbados is not the fault of the citizens but that of an ineffectual government. What is not known is whether this was the first brush with the law for the deported citizen outside of being an illegal resident. Whether this is so or not, as this citizen returns home and re-integrates into the society, he should not be stigmatised and legitimate economic opportunities should be available for him to pursue. Everyone deserves a second chance.