KINGSTON, Jamaica — Advocacy Group Jamaicans for Justice (JFJ) is voicing serious concerns over Jamaica’s agreement to accept third-country nationals (TCNs) from the United States as a temporary transit point.

In a statement on Wednesday, the group said significant constitutional questions arise regarding the legal status, treatment and detention of any such individuals while they remain in Jamaica.

The comments follow confirmation from the Government that it is considering partnering with the United States (US) to accept TCNs.

JFJ said Government assurances that only non-criminals will be transferred, with a cap of roughly 10 people within each 30-day window, full US funding, strictly temporary stays, and Jamaica’s sovereign right to refuse arrivals, are insufficient without robust, transparent, and independently verifiable safeguards.

It warned that, notwithstanding some of these proposed measures, Jamaica may still fall short of protecting its international legal obligations and its long-standing commitment to human rights.

It said central among its concerns is the risk of refoulement and chain refoulement.

The group noted that as a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, Jamaica has a binding duty not to facilitate the transfer or holding of individuals who face persecution or torture.

JFJ added that many of these TCNs already hold US findings of ‘withholding of removal’ or protection under the Convention Against Torture (CAT), confirming they cannot safely return home. Inadequate independent screening upon arrival could place Jamaica in violation of these core obligations.

Once individuals set foot on Jamaican soil, the country assumes primary legal custody and responsibility under international law and the principles of sovereignty.

“The US largely relinquishes control at that point,” said Executive Director of Jamaicans for Justice Mickel Jackson.

“If onward removal fails, because home countries refuse entry, assessment indicates high risk on return or logistical delays occur, people could be trapped in Jamaica indefinitely. Past experiences in Eswatini, Panama and Costa Rica show how quickly ‘temporary transit’ can become prolonged limbo, with serious accountability gaps.”

The group pointed out that some of these TCNs are non-criminal individuals with final US removal orders who cannot be returned directly home due to diplomatic barriers, country instability, or valid protection claims.

JFJ said many are long-term US residents with deep family ties — including US-citizen spouses and children — jobs, and community roots, but without permanent legal status.

And many hold asylum-related protection based on well-founded fears of persecution linked to political opinion or membership in a particular social group, including LGBTQ+ status.

Returning them, even indirectly through third-country transit, could expose them to severe harm, imprisonment, or violence in their countries of origin.

Stressing that real-world precedents illustrate the dangers it cited Eswatini in 2025, where several non-US nationals and even one Jamaican national sent in error endured solitary confinement and months-long uncertainty with limited legal access.

Families and torture survivors in Costa Rica and Panama faced similar arbitrary detention and pressure to abandon their claims.

“Even short stays in Jamaica raise serious humanitarian issues. Post-Hurricane Melissa resource strains heighten risks of inadequate medical care, family separation, and re-traumatisation, particularly for LGBTQ+ persons and other vulnerable groups. Clear protocols on holding conditions and where they will be housed, maximum duration, and independent monitoring are therefore critical,” it said.

JFJ further questioned whether Jamaica is prepared to fully process any asylum or protection claims these individuals may raise while on our territory.

If a TCN expresses a fear of return, will Jamaica honour its obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention by conducting a thorough, independent assessment? This requires full due process: adequate time to prepare a claim, qualified interpreters in a language the person fully understands, access to legal counsel, and a meaningful opportunity to present evidence — none of which are guaranteed under the current limited reassurances and given how Jamaica has treated Haitian nationals in the recent past.

To mitigate these risks, JFJ urges the government to:

• Immediately release the full MOU and operational procedures for parliamentary and public review;
• Require a minimum 48–72 hours’ advance notice in the individual’s language before any transfer;
• Implement independent Jamaican non-refoulement screening with qualified interpreters, access to legal representation, and full engagement of the 2009 National Refugee Policy process;
• Establish clear custody handover rules, strict maximum holding times (eg 48–72 hours), and explicit responsibility mechanisms if onward flights stall;
• Mandate civil society monitoring with regular public reporting, and
• Include strong rejection criteria and an exit clause should human rights or operational problems arise.

“Jamaica can cooperate on migration, but we must do it responsibly and lawfully,” Jackson emphasised.

“When people are on our soil, Jamaica carries the legal responsibility for their treatment. We must not allow ourselves to become a backdoor route that helps any state bypass core international refugee protections — especially for those fleeing persecution based on political opinion or their LGBTQ+ identity.

She continued, “If individuals seek asylum here, we must be willing to fully follow through with fair, transparent due process. Proper notice, clear custody rules, independent screening, access to lawyers, and full transparency are how we protect our values, our international obligations, and our reputation as a nation committed to justice and human dignity.”