The Gleaner headline on June 16 stunned many Jamaicans: "Deportee Deal – Jamaica offers to accept non-nationals booted from US." The story, based on a United States Embassy document, revealed a proposed Third-Country Nationals (TCN) agreement and referenced a memorandum of understanding (MOU) under which the US could send up to 25 foreign nationals to Jamaica every two weeks for an unspecified period. If 10 or more remain in Jamaica for over 30 days, transfers would pause until the number dropped below 10. Either country could end the arrangement with 90 days' notice.The proposal alarmed many Jamaicans, especially given the Trump administration's pledge to deport large numbers of undocumented migrants and relocate many to third countries. At a White House Cabinet meeting on April 30, 2025, United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the US was in talks with multiple countries to try to get them to take people from third countries who are in the US illegally, describing them as “despicable” and referring to them as "perverts, paedophiles and child rapists”.Numerous issues remain unresolved. Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness and National Security Minister Dr Horace Chang have insisted that those being sent here are third-country nationals, not deportees, because they are not returning to their countries of origin. Those claims are false. First, deportation simply means being expelled from a country where one has no legal right to remain; the destination is irrelevant. Second, the MOU, which I accessed and read, uses the term "deportee." Third, during a post-cabinet press briefing the day after The Gleaner story was published, Chang referred to Jamaicans being "deported" to third countries. So, people from other countries sent here by the US would be deportees too. Also, being a TCN and a deportee are not mutually exclusive.  For instance, the Council on Foreign Relations in the US refers to “third-country deportation”.Many Jamaicans also question why the US would send rejected migrants to Jamaica, a smaller, poorer country with fewer resources, instead of returning them directly to their homelands. At the press briefing, when Kimone Francis, The Gleaner reporter who broke the story, asked Chang why they were not being sent directly to their countries of origin, he said it was a "technical issue” but offered no substantive explanation. He said Jamaica would receive "third-country nationals from across the globe”, possibly “not just a few” and could "extend air transport out of here”. Yet Jamaica has direct flights to only 24 countries, compared with more than 110 from the US. So, what rational reason is there for these people to come here? Chang also said it would be preferable if the TCNs speak English and have skills. But if these individuals are merely in transit, these considerations seem irrelevant.Nationwide 90FM journalist Mahiri Stewart asked Chang who initiated the MOU and when it was signed. Chang responded that an “MOU between countries is not a matter of initiating” but later stated “…they (the US) would have taken the lead”, which appears contradictory, and admitted the MOU had been signed the previous week. Chang and later Holness insisted we were not pressured to accept the arrangement. This insistence perplexes many Jamaicans who wonder why the country would voluntarily undertake such a responsibility while many of our citizens remain in urgent need. Many Hurricane Melissa survivors are still homeless, hospitals remain overwhelmed, and many basic needs remain unmet, so why take this on? And when asked by Zahra Burton of 18 Degrees North what Jamaica was getting out of the arrangement, Chang responded that the question was “irrelevant”.The Gleaner story also reported that a Jamaican government minister proposed an arrangement with the United States that could see Jamaica receiving up to 10,000 TCNs. At the briefing, Francis asked Dr Chang, “Did the US at any time communicate that the arrangement could see Jamaica receiving up to 10,000 third-country nationals?” Chang responded, “No, there is no such discussion between the governments of Jamaica” (sic). Francis again asked, “Through no communication at all?” The answer was an emphatic “No”. The following day, The Gleaner published a story, written by Francis, about a diplomatic note from the US naming Minister Without Portfolio in the Office of the Prime Minister with responsibility for Efficiency, Innovation and Digital Transformation, Audrey Marks, as the government official who made the proposal regarding 10,000 TCNs.  I read the note, and that is indeed what was mentioned. Subsequently, during an interview with Cliff Hughes on Nationwide, Prime Minister Holness argued that the communication referred to a structured migration programme, separate from the TCN programme, and that the two were being conflated. Even if so, Chang's categorical denial that the figure of 10,000 had appeared in any communication remains difficult to reconcile.The conflicting explanations, attempts to redefine the term "deportee," the decision to assume this responsibility while Jamaica struggles to meet its own citizens' needs, the uncertainty surrounding who will arrive and how long they will remain, and the fact that we learnt about the arrangement because of a leak and not directly from the Government, in addition to the absence of parliamentary debate about the matter, have fuelled public concern. Against that backdrop, many were taken aback when Prime Minister Holness dismissed those concerns during the Nationwide interview as being "almost to the point of being ridiculous”.There is nothing ridiculous about questioning an issue on which the Government has appeared dismissive, evasive, and less than forthright. Such concerns are not irrational; they are entirely justified. The apparent arrogance, lack of transparency, and lack of empathy are deeply troubling. They invite an unsettling question: what else has the Government chosen not to disclose?

Michael Abrahams is an obstetrician and gynaecologist, social commentator, and human-rights advocate. Send feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and michabe_1999@hotmail.com, or follow him on X @mikeyabrahams.