The U.S.-backed International Organisation for Migration (IOM) programme to help resettle criminal deportees in Guyana did not produce the desired results, United States Ambassador to Guyana D Brent Hardt said. “The programme took a while to begin and they just didn’t take root as we would have liked them to,” Hardt told Guyana Times International in a recent interview.
Former Police Commissioner Winston Felix
In June 2008, Guyana signed a cooperation agreement which allowed for the (IOM) to implement immigration programmes in Guyana. The programme, which was deemed a pilot and received funding from the U.S. government, was also implemented in The Bahamas, and is based on a similar project in Haiti.
The Home Affairs Ministry was identified as the focal point for the initiative to commence where the focus was supposed to be in areas such as capacity building, advisory services and technical cooperation on migration issues.
The subsequent establishment of an IOM office in Guyana was to facilitate the implementation of the “Reintegration of the Returned Migrants Project”, proposed by the IOM in response to the request for assistance made by Caricom leaders during a meeting in 2007 with former United States President George Bush and former State Secretary Condoleezza Rice.
The influx of deportees is a top priority for many countries in the Caribbean and Latin America, and there have been calls for the U. S. to assist in addressing the issue of proper reintegration programmes for deportees from the U.S.
However, Ambassador Hardt said, “technically, it is the responsibility [of each nation] to support their nationals”, however, “it would be ideal to have programmes that aided in rehabilitation,” Hardt said.
Asked for data regarding deportees from the U.S., Hardt said there were certain legal constraints in doing this. “We have attempted to provide as much information as we can, but legalities have created some issues,” Hardt said, referring to the varying levels of information sharing that are applicable between the Freedom of Information Acts (FOIA) among the two countries. The United States alone deported over 65 Guyanese in 2011 for criminal offences.
Eskar Adams, director of the New Amsterdam-based Transitional House, an organisation that runs a programme to help resettle deportees, said the institution is home to 86 deportees.
“The youngest we’ve had was 15 and the oldest was 56,” Adams stated. He noted, too, that when deportees re-enter Guyana and have nowhere to go, they are extremely vulnerable to criminal elements.
“They can end up on the streets,” he said, noting that he was one such deportee. “I was processed and just released on the street; I had five dollars on me.” Adams was able to find a relative in Guyana; however, many are not so lucky.
“The IOM had a programme, but it is done now,” Adams said, in reference to the deportee reintegration programme.
Adams noted that deportees with nowhere to go and no family within the country are the most at-risk for criminal elements. “Immediate contact is made with outside family members and after deportees are processed, we take them in,” Adams said.
He continued that deportees who find themselves at the rehabilitation programme are under strict guidelines, and are involved in reintroduction programmes.
He told Guyana Times International, unfortunately, the police are unable to monitor the progress of deportees when they are not facilitated through rehabilitation programmes. “That doesn’t happen without help, but that’s what happens to our guys, they check in and update all their information with the police on a regular basis.”
The only other programme that was functional in Guyana that assisted deportees with rehabilitation into society was run by Donna Snaag of the Juncata Juvant Centre, but, unfortunately, it was unable to keep the doors open due to funding issues.
With the IOM programme now over and the Juncata Juvant Centre closed, the Transitional House is the only functioning rehabilitation programme for deportees within Guyana as a whole.
Surveillance
Guyana security officials have routinely blamed some of the high voltage crime here, particularly during the 2002 to 2004 crime wave on criminal deportees, and government had rushed to enact the 2002 Amendment to the Crime Prevention Act, which stated that any deportee who poses a threat to public safety can be placed under police surveillance. The amendment also states that all involuntary remigrants will not be considered first offenders.
Asked whether police had reason to monitor any deportee in recent time, Crime Chief Seelall Persaud said: “We do not monitor deportees”. He said the Guyana Police Force has the responsibility to only register deportees once they re-enter the country. He continued: “The police force follows policies”, and there were no monitoring programmes currently in place at the police level.
The GPF does keep a database of deportees reentering the country; however, once deportees are reintroduced into society, the police no longer have any interaction. Once involuntary remigrants reach Guyana, they are processed and the police are notified, deportees are then on their own. “We cannot detain Guyanese citizens with no cause,” noted Persaud.
Former Commissioner of Police Winston Felix recalled that the 2002 Amendment to the Crime Prevention Act had stated that deportees would be subject to police surveillance, if it was deemed that they may pose a threat to public safety or order.
“It was working well when I was there,” noted Felix, in reference to processing and entering the names of deportees into a database. However, he did restate the views of the current crime chief when he said, “The police can’t detain deportees once they are returning, they are adults and haven’t committed any crimes in Guyana”.
Felix told this publication that although the amendment was made to the Crime Prevention Act, it would be nearly impossible to take action. “We don’t have the manpower or the resources”, to effectively monitor deportees let alone those that may pose a threat, Felix stated.
He continued that it was troubling when deportees’ circumstances are dire.
“You know some of them don’t have family or anywhere to go,” Felix said.
