By Mark DaCosta-The Alliance For Change (AFC) has launched a sharp criticism of the Government of Guyana over its decision to accept migrants deported from the United States, questioning why the arrangement was not disclosed to the Guyanese public before the first arrivals reached the country.
In a press statement issued on September 10, the AFC described the arrangement as having significant implications for Guyana’s sovereignty, immigration policy and national security, and demanded that the full agreement with the United States be published and subjected to scrutiny in the National Assembly.
At the centre of the party’s concern is what it says was a lack of transparency surrounding an agreement that Government officials acknowledge was negotiated over several months.
“The people of Guyana only learned that the arrangement existed after foreign media reported that the first wave of deportees had already arrived,”
the AFC said.
The party questioned why citizens and Parliament were not informed earlier if, as the Government maintains, the arrangement had been under discussion for months.
The AFC is also seeking clarity on the role of the International Organisation for Migration (IOM), particularly regarding the housing and support of the deportees and what would happen if individuals ultimately sought to remain in Guyana.
Six deportees already in Guyana
Six third-country nationals—four Cubans and two Afghans—arrived in Guyana on September 5 under an arrangement described by the Government as an “Assisted Voluntary Return Program.”
Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud has said the programme followed months of discussions between Guyana and the United States and will operate for one year. According to the Government’s position, the individuals were vetted, have no criminal records, agreed voluntarily to come to Guyana and are not being permanently resettled here.
The IOM is expected to implement the programme, while the associated housing and support costs are to be covered through the arrangement.
Persaud has also indicated that the individuals will remain in Guyana while their U.S. immigration matters are addressed and that Washington has made no additional requests beyond the six persons already received.
The AFC, however, argues that Government assurances following the arrival of the first group do not replace the need for advance public disclosure and parliamentary oversight.
The party has also drawn attention to comments attributed to U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio concerning some people being deported from the United States, including his reference to individuals as “the worst people we have ever interacted with.” The AFC acknowledged that the comment may have been made in another context but said it reinforces the need for Guyanese authorities to explain exactly who is being admitted and under what safeguards.
The party’s concerns come against the backdrop of a broader U.S. policy of removing some non-citizens to countries other than their countries of nationality, with several countries having entered arrangements to receive such individuals.
AFC demands the full agreement
The AFC is demanding that the Government release the complete Guyana-U.S. migration agreement and explain the legal and administrative obligations Guyana has accepted.
Among the questions it wants answered are how many deportees Guyana could ultimately receive, what legal status they will have, how long they can remain, what happens if they cannot return to the United States or their home countries, and what security and monitoring arrangements are in place.
The party also wants the matter brought before Parliament for sustained examination.
“An insult to the Guyanese people and their elected representatives.”
That, the AFC said, would be the consequence of keeping the details of an agreement affecting Guyana’s immigration and national-security interests from public scrutiny.
At the same time, the party sought to distinguish its objection to the Government’s handling of the arrangement from opposition to international cooperation itself.
“Guyana remains a sovereign republic and international cooperation is welcome,”
the AFC stated, before drawing what it considers a critical line:
“Secret agreements affecting the people of Guyana are not.”
The party is now calling on the Government to
“come clean with the Guyanese people”
and disclose the terms of the arrangement, arguing that transparency is essential when decisions made by the Executive have consequences for who enters, resides and receives assistance in Guyana.
