HGP Nightly News – President Irfaan Ali is pushing back against mounting criticism over Guyana’s decision to accept deportees from the United States, insisting that Georgetown, not Washington, remains firmly in control of who enters the country.
Ali made the position clear during an interview with Al Jazeera on Sunday, rejecting suggestions that Guyana has compromised its human rights record by agreeing to take in non-citizens removed from the United States.
The issue moved from diplomatic discussions to reality on Friday, September 4, when six people arrived in Guyana, four from Cuba and two from Afghanistan, under a temporary, one-year Assisted Voluntary Return arrangement being managed with the International Organization for Migration.
For Ali, however, the arrangement does not mean Guyana has surrendered control over its immigration decisions.
“I don’t see this as a precedent because we can reject,” the President said. “We can say that we are not accepting this, so that has not been taken away.”
His message was equally direct when questioned about whether Guyana risks becoming a dumping ground for people Washington no longer wants.
Ali said the agreement gives Guyana the final say over who is accepted and insisted that names are provided to Guyanese authorities beforehand for their own checks.
“This is not a situation where the U.S. turns up with a plane and just throw people off on your shores,” he said.
The President was also pressed on concerns raised by international human rights groups over third-country deportations, particularly cases in which people have allegedly been wrongly removed and detained in countries where they have no ties.
Ali dismissed the suggestion that Guyana’s participation is primarily about money or commercial benefit, while acknowledging that such arrangements inevitably involve risks.
Instead, he pointed to Guyana’s treatment of migrants and Indigenous communities as evidence of what he described as the country’s strong human rights credentials.
“We have exceptionally good human rights credentials,” Ali said, while noting that Venezuelan and Cuban migrants in Guyana have access to social services.
The government says the arrangement itself is tightly controlled.
Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud said the six people in the first group underwent background checks by Guyanese authorities and were found to have no criminal records. He said discussions with the United States began as far back as January.
And there is another reason Georgetown says it is willing to consider skilled migrants: Guyana’s booming oil economy.
Persaud estimated the country is facing a labour shortage of between 70,000 and 80,000 workers, making skilled migration an increasingly important issue for the government.
Still, the arrangement is not supposed to become a permanent pipeline into Guyana.
Under the framework, only vetted, non-criminal and skilled individuals who voluntarily agree to relocation can be accepted. Their stay is temporary, with the expectation that they will eventually return to their country of origin or move to another country, depending on the outcome of their immigration cases.
Persaud said the United States has not made any additional requests for third-country deportees at this time.
Washington, meanwhile, has welcomed Guyana’s cooperation.
U.S. Ambassador to Guyana Nicole Theriot said bilateral discussions had been taking place for months and thanked Georgetown for helping the United States deal with its migration challenges.
But outside government circles, the arrangement remains controversial.
Amnesty International, Refugees International and Human Rights First have raised concerns about third-country removals, warning about the risks of people being sent to unfamiliar countries, potential human rights violations and the possibility of individuals ultimately being returned to places where they could face persecution.
The Trump administration has defended the policy as a tool to tackle immigration backlogs and strengthen border enforcement. U.S. legal authorities have also relied on provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act allowing third-country removals where returning someone directly to their home country is considered impracticable, inadvisable or impossible.
Legal challenges to the policy in the United States are continuing.
For Guyana, the government insists the arrangement does not strip deportees of their ability to seek protection and says international agencies, including the IOM and UNHCR, remain part of the framework.
