Ramotar hammers “disgraceful” U.S. deportee deal

Sep 11, 2026 News

---

…says U.S. will turn around and issue advisories for tourist not to visit our country because of crimes

(Kaieteur News) – Former President Donald Ramotar has launched a scathing attack on the controversial deportation arrangement between the United States and countries in the Caribbean, describing the programme as “disgraceful” and rejecting claims that Guyana and other recipient states stand to benefit from the skills of deportees.

Guyana recently received six deportees under the arrangement, which has triggered concerns about the nature of the persons being sent to the region and the implications for countries agreeing to accept them. Ramotar, in a letter to this newspaper questioned why Caribbean governments would accept persons whom Washington itself is seeking to remove from its territory. “Instead, they have sent us persons that they want out of their countries and regional governments are accepting those rejects. Indeed, in order to put up a good spin on that disgraceful action, we are told it would be good for us. It is even suggested that accepting these US rejects, we would be acquiring skills.”

Ramotar pointed specifically to comments made by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, arguing that Rubio had been unequivocal about the type of persons the United States was seeking to transfer to third-world countries. “However, the US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio is very clear on who those persons are. In an interview, he said openly that, “We are actively searching for other countries to take people from third-world countries… We are working with other countries to say we want to send you some of the most despicable human beings to your countries, would you do that as a favour to us. And the further away from America, the better so they can’t come back across the border. I’m not apologetic about it. The President (Trump) was elected to keep America safe and to get rid of a bunch of perverts, paedophiles and child rapists out of our country…””

Ramotar said Rubio’s characterisation of those being removed from the United States should put to rest any suggestion that the programme is primarily about transferring valuable skills to Caribbean countries. “So, please spare us the talk that this programme imposed by the US is going to give us skills. One of the immoralities of this project is that the US will turn around and issue advisories for tourist not to visit our countries because of crimes!”

Ramotar’s intervention adds to the growing political criticism of the arrangement. This newspaper reported earlier this week that the deal has come under fire from political leaders and human rights advocates, who are demanding that the administration immediately make the full agreement public. The controversy intensified following the arrival in Guyana on Friday of the first six individuals under the arrangement: four from Cuba and two from Afghanistan. No information has been shared on the background of the deportees who arrived here.

Come clean

Meanwhile, the Alliance For Change (AFC) in a statement last Thursday also condemned the government’s decision to allow Guyana to become a destination for non-Guyanese criminals and undesirables being deported from the United States, and particularly, the secretive manner in which this arrangement was negotiated and is being implemented. “The most egregious aspect is not simply that the Government volunteered Guyana for this programme. It is that the people of Guyana only learned that the arrangement existed after foreign media reported that the first wave of deportees had already arrived. We have heard anecdotally that the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) may have some involvement with the settlement of these deportees. The details of this arrangement, if true, must also be shared, and by extension, what plans does the government have if these persons decide to make Guyana their permanent home? Is this a desirable outcome that has been catered for,” AFC said in a statement.

The party aid the government now says that negotiations took place for months. “If so, why were Guyanese citizens not informed? Why was the National Assembly not given an opportunity to examine an arrangement with obvious implications for Guyana’s sovereignty, immigration policy and national security? The concern is heightened by the language used by US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio in describing persons being deported by the United States, referring to some as “the worst people we have ever interacted with.” While we recognise that this statement could have been made in a different context, it underscores the seriousness of accepting deportees from another jurisdiction and the need for complete transparency about who is being sent here and why.”

“The Alliance For Change therefore demands that the Government immediately publishes the full agreement with the United States; and submits itself to a rigorous debate and discussion within the National Assembly. An account must be given of what agreements and commitments have been made on the people’s behalf, and constant scrutiny must be allowed. Anything short of this is an insult to the Guyanese people and their elected representatives. The AFC reaffirms that Guyana remains a sovereign republic and international cooperation is welcome. However, secret agreements affecting the people of Guyana are not. The Alliance For Change calls on the Government to come clean with the Guyanese people,” the statement concluded.

One year agreement

The government finalised a one-year migration cooperation framework with the United States, under which the country will receive, according to a statement issued on Saturday, limited, vetted group of non-criminals, skilled individuals through the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) Assisted Voluntary Return Programme.  The agreement marks the immediate rollout of a temporary third-country deportation mechanism, with an initial cohort of six deportees, four originating from Cuba and two from Afghanistan, arriving in Guyana on Friday. In brief remarks on Sunday, Nicole Theriot U.S. Ambassador to Guyana told this newspaper that the U.S. has been working on the arrangement with Guyana for many months. The deal outlines a temporary arrangement for individuals who voluntarily opt for relocation to Guyana while awaiting the final determination of their immigration status. Official government statements detailed that depending on the outcome of their cases, individuals will either return to their country of origin or relocate elsewhere of their choosing. The arrangement operates under strict parameters and does not offer open-ended residency or permanent resettlement.

Under the agreed terms, the United States Government will bear the complete financial burden of the relocation exercise, ensuring Guyana incurs no financial liability. The operational execution of the framework falls directly under the IOM, which will fund and manage reception, housing, basic support, and social integration services, including healthcare, employment supervision, and facilitating contact with legal counsel and family. The IOM confirmed that the arrangement does not transfer any of the state’s official legal duties concerning immigration admission, protection, legal stay, or deportation. The administration maintained that Guyana holds total sovereignty and retains complete veto power to review and deny any individual put forward by U.S. authorities. Only individuals who explicitly consent to relocate of their own free will, have been denied asylum in the U.S. without wanting to return home, and meet strict non-criminal and skill criteria will be admitted.

Addressing the issue in his latest column, Chartered Accountant, Christopher Ram said agreement is concerning. “Economics can hardly explain it. If not money, is it goodwill, strategic credit or insurance against Venezuela – or is this simply President Ali’s vulgar, unauthorised and unlawful attempt to find favour with Washington?” Ram said in the process, he has placed Guyana in the same basket as Eswatini, Equatorial Guinea, Liberia and other states recruited into the Trump administration’s third-country deportation programme. Eswatini is receiving deportees under a US$5.1 million arrangement, while Liberia has agreed to accept as many as 1,200 third-country nationals. “This perhaps is the most discomforting development of all, coming on top of the broken promises at home. I believed the PPP/C when it pledged to renegotiate the 2016 Petroleum Agreement. In office, it abandoned that promise for “better contract administration”, while refusing to insist on protections such as ring-fencing and stronger fiscal terms. Production accelerated; State capacity and contractual protection did not.

Breach of constitution

On Monday, the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), said the arrangement reeks of disregard for human rights and may violate Guyana’s Constitution. In a strongly worded statement, the association rejected President Ali’s reported claim that persons sent to Guyana “chose” to come here, arguing that such a claim is difficult to sustain when the alternatives reportedly include countries such as Equatorial Guinea and El Salvador. The organisation said no amount of official justification could erase what it described as the “pervasive stench” surrounding the agreement. More seriously, the GHRA contends that the Government’s decision could breach Article 141(1) of the Constitution, which states that “No person shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading punishment or other treatment.”

The human rights body stressed that the constitutional protection applies to all persons, not merely Guyanese citizens, and contains no exception permitting the State to expose deportees to inhumane or degrading treatment. The Government, it said, has also failed to explain the legal basis for agreeing to receive an undisclosed number of deportees in the future.

Leader of Forward Guyana Movement, Member of Parliament, Amanza Walton said the administration concluded months of secret negotiations without informing the National Assembly or briefing the relevant Sectoral Committee on Foreign Relations. She too raised concerns regarding the legal, security, and administrative gaps in the framework, emphasising that the public was left to learn about the deal through foreign news outlets. “Guyanese deserve answers on this third-country deportee agreement,” Walton stated, criticising the government’s timeline. Walton stressed that reliance on the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) to administer the framework does not absolve the state of its constitutional responsibilities. Pointing out that Guyana lacks national asylum legislation and is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, she questioned which domestic agencies would oversee the admission, legal protection, and potential removal of the arrivals. “The government’s own release admits that IOM will not assume, and the arrangement will not transfer to it, any of the government’s responsibilities concerning admission, legal stay, protection or removal,” Walton warned. “Those four functions remain with Guyana alone.

Another Member of Parliament, Ganesh Mahipaul warned that Guyanese citizens must not be made a secondary priority in their own country. While the administration framed the deal as an extension of Guyana’s international human rights commitments, Mahipaul argued that the nation’s fragile public infrastructure is ill-prepared to handle additional obligations. He emphasised that while Guyanese are historically known for their hospitality and willingness to assist those in need, serious questions remain regarding the state’s institutional capacity. “My concern is not with helping people, nor am I opposed to Guyana being a hospitable nation,” Mahipaul stated. “My concern is whether our country has the institutional capacity to properly manage and monitor this programme and live up to the responsibilities it is accepting.”

---

• Deportee deal, Donald Ramotar, US/Guyana

---