-arouses suspicion of human smuggling

By Richard Bhainie

THE address provided to the immigration authorities by the 26 Haitians who were recently detained in Guyana has turned out to be the location of Surinam Airways along with an empty lot.

In court documents seen by this newspaper, the Haitians provided Lot 110 Barrack Street, Kingston, Georgetown, as the address where they would be staying while in Guyana, but investigations by the police revealed that the owner of the land at the said address is one Janiel Lee, who resided at the property with his family.Lee subsequently informed the authorities that the property was demolished in August, 2020. When the Sunday Chronicle visited the location, it was discovered that the lot is divided in two with Surinam Airways occupying one part, while the remaining part was abandoned.

The court documents also disclosed that one of the Haitians also provided a Kitty, Georgetown, address but the occupants of the said address denied knowing or expecting the arrival of the individuals.During an interview with the Sunday Chronicle, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, explained that this, along with other factors aroused the government’s suspicion of the individuals being involved in people-smuggling.

Investigations by the Trafficking in Persons Unit of the Criminal Investigations Department (CID), further fuelled the authorities’ suspicion. The court documents related that on November 07, acting upon information, a party of policemen conducted a raid at a city hotel where they found 13 Haitians solely occupying the hotel. Meanwhile, on November 08, a bus transporting 12 Haitians and one Guyanese was intercepted at a police roadblock at Amelia’s Ward Public Road, Linden, where the conductor of the bus informed the police that the Haitians were being transported to Wismar Shore for further transportation.

Upon suspicion that the Haitians were being trafficked to Brazil, they were placed in protective custody and transported to the Criminal Investigations Department (CID) Trafficking in Persons Unit for questioning. During interrogation, it was revealed that there were also five children travelling with the group, who had no relation to anyone in the group. Two of the children, ages 9 and 13, were travelling with a woman who informed investigators that she is the aunt of the two children; however, she later admitted that she lied to the police. She disclosed that she received the two children at the airport in Haiti and had never met them before, and they were en route to French Guiana.

Meanwhile, the authorisation of travel for the other three children, ages seven, 13 and 17, did not correspond with the individual listed on it and the person with whom they were travelling. Based on the information discovered, the Haitians were subsequently placed into protective custody at the Hugo Chavez Centre for Rehabilitation and Reintegration.

RACIAL DISCRIMINATION
The government came under heavy scrutiny for detention of the said Haitians, with accusations of racial discrimination purported. The Attorney General dismissed the claims of racial discrimination and alluded to a similar position taken by the government against Cubans, in dealing with the larger issue of people-smuggling. “It is not a question of Haitians alone, but it is an issue of unlawful emigration and people-smuggling,” Nandlall explained. He added: “There were 1,000 Cubans that had to be blocked from coming to Guyana, a similar position, and for that reason the ferry opening was cancelled.”

Nandlall referred to existing data to highlight a large number of individuals arriving in Guyana; however, a vast majority have not legally departed. He highlighted that in 2018, the Parliamentary Sectoral Committee on Foreign Relations, chaired by then Opposition Chief Whip Gail Teixeira, had summoned then Minister of Citizenship Winston Felix to appear before the committee to discuss matters pertaining to human-smuggling. According to data provided by the then Ministry of Citizenship to the committee, there was no departure record to account for some 3,224 Haitians who arrived in Guyana in 2017.

The data also displayed that between January and April 2018, of 1,238 Haitians that arrived in Guyana, only 85 officially left. As a result, some 4,377 Haitians were unaccounted for between 2017 and 2018. In relation to Cubans, there were no departure records for some 7,255 of 44,747 Cubans who arrived in Guyana in 2017. Meanwhile, between January and April 2018, 6,170 Cubans failed to depart Guyana through a recognised port of exit. Nandlall informed this publication that from all indications the situation has only gotten worse. He explained that the data suggests that when persons enter Guyana, they are able to make their way into other neighbouring territories due to Guyana’s inability to rigorously monitor the borders, a proposition previously upheld by Felix.

“Former Minister Felix in 2018 told a Parliamentary Committee on Foreign Relations that he is not worried about the thousands of Haitians entering Guyana because they are going to other countries; this amounted to a public admission that Guyana is being used as a trans-shipment point for people-smuggling,” Nandlall explained. The Attorney General explained that this can have detrimental effects for Guyana, especially for trade relations and therefore Guyana cannot be seen as a trans-shipment point. Further, he explained that the accusation of Guyana discriminating against a particular group of people is preposterous, especially when the Caribbean has adopted a similar stance to combat the issue at hand.

“The complexity of this situation has led to almost every country in the CARICOM region imposing a visa requirement in respect of Haitians; it would be plainly foolish to argue that all the countries are discriminating against Haitians on the ground of race,” Nandlall said. Nandlall explained that the government has engaged various governments and agencies to assist with the matter, including the Cuban government, the Suriname government, the United States of America Embassy and the United Nations agencies in relation to migration within Guyana. “The Cuban government has been engaged and they say they have no role to play; these people are not here with their support and they related that we should uphold our laws,” Nandlall disclosed.

He added: “The Suriname government has been engaged and they are committed to managing the situation, so Guyana cannot be accused of acting unilaterally.” The Attorney General recognised and acknowledged the complexity of the situation, as it is a matter involving fundamental human rights, and explained that persons should steer clear of utilising the situation for political gain. “Because we are dealing with human rights, this matter is very complex and complicated and one has to balance national interest against the human rights of the victims of this nefarious smuggling scheme. I therefore caution persons not to exploit this issue for political gain and the pursuit of selfish agendas,” Nandlall said. While the government has faced tremendous criticism from the public at large for the decision to hold the Haitians in protective custody, Nandlall explained that government has made the decision in keeping with the best interest of the country.

Nandlall explained that the presenting of false information to immigration officials by the Haitians was in contravention of Section 9 (1) (a) of the Immigration Act 1948, by virtue of which resulted in the individuals becoming prohibited immigrants, and therefore warranted grounds for their deportation. “That is all that the government sought to do, but the matter has been discoloured by the sensationalism and sinister objectives which have become attached to the issue,” Nandlall explained. Last week, Chief Justice (ag) Roxane George, S.C. granted a conservatory order staying a previous order made by Principal Magistrate Sherdel Isaacs-Marcus for deportation of the Haitians. The Haitians were released from protective custody on Wednesday night at an address of their choice, given the uncertainty in relation to when the case will be concluded. The case is scheduled to come up again on December 18, 2020.