By Hubert Williams

Bridgetown, Barbados, June 8, 2015 — “Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark”… thus wrote William Shakespeare “Bard of Avon” in “Hamlet, Prince of Denmark”, one of his many memorable plays – a talent that has fascinated generations across the Globe for four centuries now… and his works will long represent the best of the English Language.

Shakespeare brilliantly literaturized the qualities, frailties and foibles of his society; and each generation since (all of which have embraced Shakespeare’s genius) has discovered that ours has such frailties as well – and that he merely chose literature to project the reality of the human condition everywhere… in every country, every culture, every generation.
Shakespeare put those unforgettable words “something is rotten in the State of Denmark” into the mouth of an officer of Denmark’s palace guard upon appearance of the ghost of the murdered King walking over the palace walls.

Nowadays, in just about every situation – especially those that are English-linked – when corruption/impropriety is afoot, malfeasance abroad or incompetence evident, or, generally, when things seem to be not going right or some funny business is taking place – we seek expression in Shakespeare’s genius and declare “Something is rotten in the State of Denmark”.

Shakespeare’s words now seem to be applicable to the level of competence at the Consular Section of the American Embassy in Georgetown which has the prerogative for issuing entry visas to the USA. Ordinary Guyanese have been applying in large numbers for visitors’ visas, the fee now having risen to a non-refundable US$160 (more than G$32,000). Most applicants are rejected, for various reasons, the principal one being failure to convince the interviewing officer that they will not breach the conditions of the visa and abscond in the USA.

All things being equal, that is right and fair. However, there seems that “Something is rotten in the State of Denmark”, for while many genuine applicants with no intent to abscond find themselves unable to convince interviewing officers of their honesty and integrity and that they will not stay illegally in the USA, an increasing number of dishonest applicants seem to be “getting through”, some of them criminally bent and are smuggling illegal drugs/narcotics into the USA.

Some are caught at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport at Timehri, and others at US ports of entry, particularly Miami Airport and the JFK Airport in New York. The Press reports on those caught, but there is no way of finding out how many of the criminal couriers “get through” to deliver their concealed narcotics to whomsoever and collect their ill-gotten rewards.

The frequency of reports in the Guyana Press of US-bound smugglers caught at the local airport pre-departure, sometimes aboard the flight, and frequently on arrival in the USA, must distress the many honest but rejected visa applicants.
Some Press reports have told of airport law-enforcement authorities reporting cases of about-to-depart visa-holders with drug-filled condoms stuffed into unmentionable places; some others who had swallowed capsules of narcotics; and yet others who had been exposed masking illegal substances in alcohol and other products; and still others bundling their contraband supplies in suitcase cavities as well as wrapped up among other general passenger items in luggage such as clothing, shoes and permissible foodstuff.
Detecting the miscreants at the interview is extremely difficult for Consular personnel, for it is they who are more likely to be calm, collected and confident during the questioning process of their application.

Contrarily, it is the innocents who tend to be ill at ease and nervous, because they do not see a need to rehearse before “going in”.
Thousands of Guyanese know the pain of being rejected in their visa applications, and have lost their fees… and many an honest man/woman have had that distressing experience more than once, for they return and re-apply, always in the belief that “I’ll get it this time”.
There is abundant evidence that rejection has nothing to do with ethnicity, where you live, or what work you do; though rough figures indicate that women feel the ‘pinch’ more than men… if they are not married, don’t own their own homes, and that sort of thing. Their word is seldom good enough. Some females emerge in tears after the consular interview and rejection.

From my observation of reports in the Guyana newspapers, it seems so frequently that it is Guyanese nationals already resident in the USA and visiting their homeland who are attempting as they depart to break the law and earn “filthy lucre” by secreting illegal drugs “wherever”.
“My cousin, Mrs. Velma Gaskin, has had the rejection experience five times, and still believes that eventually her honesty will win out. She has been sorely disappointed, but remained always courageous, believing that she will be able to visit the USA some day.
However, time is going. She is now over 3-score-and-10. She says: “Every time I apply for a US visitor’s visa, there is hope; but then disappointment and despair – until next time, when hope springs anew”.

Over her earlier years in “BG”, then later Guyana, she had been very close to an elderly cousin, my mother, Mrs. Audrey Williams – indeed for a period she and her family shared our residence on Duncan Street – who in time migrated to the United Kingdom, and later the United States, taking up residence in Brooklyn, New York.
Family celebrations in both countries (the UK and the USA) are periodic and she always receives invitations. She has visited England; did not abscond; returning to Guyana as per her airline schedule.

Her repeated US rejections include a request to travel for her cousin’s 100th birthday celebrations in January 2010; and later for a return visit to the UK when my sister booked her on a Georgetown-to-London journey on US-owned Delta Airlines, transiting a south-eastern US airport. On the day of intended travel, the airline refused to board her as she had not been aware of the need for a transit visa (she was going to England), and part of the fare was withheld.
On the death in 2012 of my mom in her 103rd year, the oft-rejected applicant again sought a visitor’s visa to be able to attend the funeral in New York, and was again refused… the obvious message being that… the more determined you are to seek to gain entry, the more determined we are to refuse.

Awestruck by her experiences, she asked: “Why me?” She is peaceable and law-abiding; no problems within the home; no political affiliations or party card; no problems with the law or ever having been taken to court; lives in peace with all her neighbours; and is a deeply committed Christian and conscientious community worker within the congregation of an Anglican church in Georgetown. Her unblemished record prompts her to ask “Why me?” And it is through her faith and Christian beliefs that she persists in repeatedly re-applying.
Guyana is a very difficult environment – for both the Consular personnel in Georgetown and genuine, honest visa applicants such as “Mrs. Gaskin”.

In recent years, because of the country’s perplexing political, social, economic and cultural conditions (with much of its serious criminal activity linked to US deportees), its rate of migration outstrips those of just about all other jurisdictions in the Caribbean (except Haiti).
Therefore, the suspicion of official America seems to be that almost all Guyanese are anxious to get out of the country and into the USA “by hook or by crook”, and are not above using guile, subterfuge and any other means to success. That is understandable. In a society where moral standards have degenerated from the second half of the1900s, and dishonesty, crime and violence during the 2000s reaching unprecedented levels, it is a considerable challenge for Consular officials to separate the “wheat” from the “chaff” among visa applicants.

There is this other likely contentious element to what is a very complex problem: Some Guyanese are coming to the view that because of the high rate of rejection of honest-to-goodness applicants for short-term visitors’ visas and the policy of always escheating the high fee, a very huge, very rich and very powerful country like the United States is deliberately skimming members of the relatively impoverished Guyanese public of what is for them a hefty portion of scant financial resources.

Obviously, something needs to be done. It is difficult to accept that there are not systems within today’s technological advances that can resolve the current seemingly glaring inadequacies in the assessment skills of America’s Consular staff in Georgetown … perhaps the installation of some kind of in-office lie detector equipment.
Public evidence of lie detectors operating in other circumstances show them to be virtually fail-proof (eventually such might be utilized to transform the global justice system, accurately determining truth and levels of guilt; and thereby freeing jurors everywhere for productive work away from the courtrooms).

Consular personnel should still have the prerogative of saying “no” to any applicant for just and sufficient reason, but not merely because there is suspicion that the applicant is lying about the intention to abscond and remain in the United States as an illegal immigrant.
The interview and its outcome must accord both with the national security and safety requirements for entering the United States and the need to minimize the extent of disappointment and loss of pecuniary resources suffered by genuine and honest visa applicants.

Except the current system and practices are adjusted in order to ensure justice and fair-play to all, the Guyanese public would likely conclude that “Something is rotten in the State of Denmark”.