Caribbean & Central America - December 2013 (ISSN 1741-4458)

The denial on 19 November of the right of entry into Trinidad & Tobago for 13 Jamaican nationals has raised tensions between the two countries and challenged the authority of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). The Jamaicans complained that “their passports were confiscated by the Trinidadians and that they were ordered to sit on a wooden bench throughout the night before they were…bundled on a Caribbean Airlines Flight”.  Amongst other things, the dispute has led to a burgeoning social-media driven boycott of Trinidadian goods in Jamaica.

The 19 November issue was not an isolated one.  Up to 1,000 Jamaicans have been barred from entering Trinidad over the past three years.  But the latest episode is particularly controversial because it went against the CCJ ruling in October on the case of Shanique Myrie, a Jamaican, and the Barbados government.

In the Shanique Myrie case, the CCJ noted that she “arrived at Grantley Adams International Airport in Barbados and was denied entry into that country…detained overnight in a cell...and deported to Jamaica the following day”.  The court ruled in favour of Myrie and made a declaration that Barbados had “breached Ms Myrie’s right to enter Barbados”. The Court highlighted that in order for a Member State to limit the right of entry of a national of another Member State "in the interest of public morals, national security and safety, and national health”, the visiting national must present “a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society”.

The case is viewed as setting an important precedent, but the decision appears not to have brought about any immediate change in Trinidad’s procedures.

Trinidad & Tobago’s National Security Minister, Gary Griffith, told the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian in an interview that there were “valid reasons for denying the Jamaicans entry”, but the exact nature of these reasons has yet to be revealed.  Griffith sought to justify the move by saying that people who made false claims at immigration would continue to be turned back.

Griffith said: “In the case of several individuals we had similar situations.  For example, one person said she was bringing a child to meet her father and the father never shows at the airport, one said she was on vacation but only had US$250, and another said they were here to work with no Caricom skills certificate.”

In this incident, an 11 year-old girl and her chaperone, Anne Gordon, were among those denied entry into Trinidad. The girl had been on her way to see her father who lived in Trinidad. Both Gordon and the girl presented Caricom passports, and according to Gordon: “They just took our passports and told us we did not meet their entry requirements. If her father lives there why did they refuse the child the chance to see her father?”

The CCJ ruling on the Myrie case also highlighted that where a Caricom national is refused entry into a member state, that national should be allowed to consult an attorney, a consular official, or to contact a family member. The Jamaicans have stated that they were not given such rights and “were not even allowed to use their cellular phones to contact anyone”.

Trinidad remains unrepentant, with Griffith highlighting the fact that there are nearly 17,000 Jamaican nationals living illegally in Trinidad following the expiry of their entry certificates.  He has said that if these undocumented and unregistered Jamaicans are working to maintain themselves, “this means they are depriving the state of an estimated TT$700m(US$109m) in taxes annually”.

This sort of comment is hardly designed to calm the growing animosity throughout Jamaica, which is being fuelled not just by a sense of humiliation but also by a sense of economic injustice based on the huge trade deficit run by Jamaica with Trinidad.  Jamaica’s imports from Trinidad in 2012 came to US$702.2m; its exports to Trinidad amounted to just US$18.3m.  The fact that much of the deficit is accounted for by oil and related products, which would have to be imported from somewhere, does little to alleviate the sense of grievance.  It is widely believed in Jamaica that its products cannot compete because Trinidadian producers have the advantage of cheap energy.

Nor is the threat of a boycott of goods from Trinidad & Tobago confined to consumers.  Doreen Frankson, a former president of the Jamaica Manufacturers’ Association (JMA), appeared to support a boycott when she asserted: “We are not powerless and they depend on our market to grow their productive sector.”  However, Frankson also revealed that the animosity is based on far more than just economics.  She said: “I don’t go to Trinidad because I don’t want to be humiliated.”

In attempt to reduce the tensions, Trinidad and Tobago’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Winston Dookeran, flew to Jamaica on 2 December. Jamaica’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, Senator AJ Nicholson, said the meeting had been arranged in the hope that through collaboration the issue could be brought “to a speedy and successful conclusion”.