With little prior public discussion, Dr Horace Chang, minister of national security and peace (and deputy prime minister), announced that a memorandum of understanding (MoU) had been signed between Washington and Kingston to facilitate the transit of deportees from the United States (US) to Jamaica. A subdued but growing public backlash followed but was restrained by recognition that protest was necessary but futile. The Government’s “done deal” approach brooked no argument.
The announcement left many Jamaicans stunned. Days later, the issue continues to generate intense debate. The public outcry is not merely the transit arrangement itself. Outrage has targeted the blatant lack of transparency, consultation, and public explanation surrounding a decision with significant national implications.
The minister elaborated that the MoU deal was for an “agreed quota [of] 25 individuals to be facilitated every two weeks for transit through Jamaica to a third territory, including their home countries.” This development has been seen as primarily a question of immigration policy. However, the lack of democratic accountability and clarity in public pronouncements on the matter have also been at the heart of arguments probing the structure of this arrangement.
Who will manage and get paid for the logistical preparations? Does the quota of 25 third-country nationals (TCNs) per fortnight have a finite number of weeks for conclusion? Is the deal just an in-transit endeavour? Should we accept the prime minister’s word that the arrangement is a friendly gesture between the Jamaican Government and Uncle Sam, a long-standing partner?
On the heels of these questions, the Johnny Nash classic, which was recorded in 1972 on a reggae rhythm, comes to mind. We need all the help we can get to untangle the conundrum in which Jamaica has landed.
There are more
Questions than answers
Pictures in my mind that will not show
When inquiries were raised about the transit arrangement’s legitimacy, the state officials responded that the operational details were being finalised. How can you sign an MoU without first clarifying the terms and conditions of your operations?
There are more
Questions than answers
And the more I find out
The less I know.
What if the individuals being deported from the United States had fled life-threatening circumstances? What were the criteria of selection for deportation? In what many critics regard as a climate of increasingly restrictive and racially charged immigration policies, to what extent might Jamaica be complicit with human- rights violations? Could such arrangements create ethical concerns about the treatment and movement of vulnerable people?
I’ve asked the questions
time and time again
Why is there so little love among men?
To mollify erupting public opinion, the officials have said that if some nationals are awarded asylum status, through the courts, they will be allowed to stay in Jamaica. How long could such a process take?
It has been a long time since the 1983 spontaneous combustion that saw islandwide demonstrations against gas-price hikes. In the past, demonstrations were the preferred protest mechanism if and when the frustrated masses felt that Government had crossed a red line. Nowadays, the appetite for public protests is at an all-time low. This does not mean that there is no tangible objection. The river has just taken other courses. Survival is paramount over public displays of displeasure. Low voter turnout also does not mean that the public has relinquished access to voice. The silence is strategic.
This deportation exercise is bound to put a damper on the migration aspirations of many Jamaicans. Speaking of which, what will happen to Jamaicans who may be among the persons who have lost their foothold on the shaky shores of our northern neighbour? Will they be treated as regular deportees? What safeguards exist to ensure that the rights of deportees are protected throughout the process?
Oh, what is life?
How do we live?
What should we take?
And how much should we give?
According to the minister of national security and peace, “the decision to enter the agreement was reached following extensive negotiations between the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade and National Security and Peace, the Office of the Prime Minister, and lawyers from the Attorney General’s Office”.
So the Cabinet also approved the decision. Did the Cabinet’s approval simply reflect the governing party’s parliamentary majority? Or did the Opposition People’s National Party concur with this plan?
There are more questions than answers.
From public reports, we understand that the US will assume responsibility for the TCNs as they transit through Jamaica to their final destinations. Does this mean full coverage of costs for accommodation, transportation, security, and psychosocial support? To say nothing of the retinue of staff that may be required to ensure efficient administration, monitoring, evaluation, reporting, and all the paraphernalia likely to be involved in this process.
At the end of the day, the lack of transparency still rankles. Citing examples from the region does not ease the discomfort. Instead, more questions keep churning to the surface. Does the fact that other countries like Barbados, St Kitts, and Antigua and Barbuda have sealed similar agreements justify Jamaica’s compliance with this initiative? When the State bypasses meaningful public consultation on major decisions, do they care that they are squandering the social capital of public trust?
And the more I find out
The less I know.
How relevant is it for citizens of Jamaica to recognise how limited their opportunities are to influence major policy decisions once they have already been made? Closer attention should be paid to the practical implications of the MoU even as policymakers are fumbling due to the poor-planning pitfalls that are bound to appear in the roadway once the floodgates are opened. If transparency, ethics, public trust, and economic accountability are treated as afterthoughts, Jamaicans will continue to ask the same questions. And until those questions are answered, there will remain more questions than answers.
Imani Tafari-Ama, PhD, is a Pan-African advocate and gender and development specialist. Send feedback to i.tafariama@gmail.com and columns@gleanerjm.com.
