Guyana should reject forced US deportees

Sep 08, 2026 News ### …says it’s a ... lamentable decision’ ... (Kaieteur News) – The Guyana Government’s decision to support a United States policy of forcibly relocating asylum-seekers and migrants to third-world countries has come under blistering criticism from the Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA), which says the arrangement reeks of disregard for human rights and may violate Guyana’s Constitution. ... The GHRA’s immediate demand is straightforward: the Government must release the full text of the agreement with the United States governing the acceptance and treatment of deported persons. ... The government has 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 US Ambassador to Guyana said 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. ... terms, the ... bear the complete financial ... incurs no financial liability ... basic support, and social integration services ... 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. ... Foreign Secretary Robert Persaud confirmed to Al Jazeera that the initial cohort had been vetted by Guyanese authorities and found to have no criminal backgrounds. The Miami Herald quoted Persaud as stating that Guyana reached the agreement after months of discussions dating back to January. He pointed out that Guyana’s position regarding accepting skilled migrants is tied to its ongoing oil boom, which has created an estimated skills gap of 70,000 to 80,000 workers. Persaud added that the U.S. has not made any further requests for third-country deportations to Guyana at this time. Guyana is the latest of several member states to receive U.S. deportees, joining St. Kitts and Nevis, Belize, Dominica, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Lucia. Nevis signed a memorandum of understanding to accept non-criminal deportees from CARICOM nations, excluding Haitians, after facing US visa restrictions. Other nations agreeing to third-country deportations include Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Costa Rica, Mexico, El Salvador, Paraguay, Ghana, Eswatini, Rwanda, South Sudan, Uganda, Cameroon, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Poland, and Uzbekistan. Reports indicate the Trump administration has approached at least 58 governments, utilising leverage such as tariff concessions or threats of travel bans and diplomat restrictions, while paying ancillary integration expenses.

Since February 2025, the United States has significantly expanded its policy to send people it wants to remove from its territory to countries that they are not from and have no connection to. While this practice is not new, the Trump administration has been doing this in ways that are increasingly discriminatory and violate fundamental rights. The second Trump administration has so far concluded new agreements with more than 30 countries for the removal of third country nationals (for updated figures, see Third Country Deportation Watch). The Migration Policy Institute estimates that around 15,000 people were removed to third countries between January and December 2025 alone – 13,000 of them to Mexico. Many of them have been arbitrarily detained in the country of destination. This policy is unlawful, as it violates the due process guarantees that people are entitled to before removal. Additionally, in many cases it is placing thousands at risk of human rights violations in the country they are sent to. Amnesty International experts answer some of the key questions to understand why this policy must be repealed. ... Third country removals send people that the United States wants out of its territory to countries other than their own, even if people have never been there before, have no connections in the country, and don’t speak the language. Some of the individuals removed are arbitrarily detained in the country of destination and many struggle to access independent legal support. All find themselves in an extremely precarious and stressful situation, far from their usual support networks. ... agreeing to receive individuals who ... wants out of ... are repatriated ... States to remove people to third countries? International law imposes strict limits on states’ ability to transfer people to other countries. These limits guarantee that people are not sent to danger and that due process is followed. The US government has brazenly violated the right to due process and undermined the rule of law by unlawfully removing people, with callous disregard to the risk that they may be then sent back to danger. ... In many cases, the US government has removed people who the US had granted some protection, including from torture. Individuals have been removed while their cases where still being heard in court. What’s more, changes in the procedure required under US law before someone is sent to a third country has made it extremely difficult for individuals to meaningfully challenge their removal. People have the right not to be transferred to a country where they would be at real risk of human rights violations, such as torture or enforced disappearance (what is called the principle of non-refoulement). They also have the right not to be transferred to a country where they would not be protected from refoulement (i.e. countries from which there could be an onward transfer into danger). States have an obligation to give non-nationals a meaningful opportunity to challenge the transfer on the grounds that it would put them at risk of serious human rights violations. ... the actions of the ... ## What is Amnesty International calling for? The US government should stop sending people to countries where they risk being arbitrarily detained and/or sent back to danger in their country of origin. All those removed to third countries should be readmitted into the United States and provided full reparation. The receiving countries should immediately release all individuals who have been arbitrarily detained and ensure access to a fair and efficient asylum process. All other nations should deny the US government’s cruel and inhumane mass deportation campaign any form of facilitation, cooperation or tolerance. They should denounce the removals as unlawful and condemn in the strongest terms their xenophobic and racialized impacts.