Letter of the Day | Non-refoulement at our shores: Jamaica’s legal obligation to protect Haitians

THE EDITOR, Madam:

Jamaica stands at a critical moral, legal, and humanitarian crossroads as we continue to turn away groups of Haitian asylum seekers who arrive on our shores in desperation. The pattern has become painfully familiar: overloaded vessels drift into Portland, St Mary, or St Thomas; frightened families step onto our beaches seeking safety; and after minimal processing, they are swiftly repatriated.

This now-routine cycle raises uncomfortable questions about who we are becoming as a nation, what values we claim to uphold, and whether we take our regional and international commitments seriously.

Haiti’s crisis is not abstract. The country is experiencing near-total societal collapse—unrestrained gang violence, mass displacement, political disintegration, acute hunger, and the breakdown of essential services. Those fleeing are not economic opportunists in search of advantage. They are mothers trying to keep their children from being killed, young people escaping forced gang recruitment, survivors of sexual violence, and families simply searching for a place where they can breathe without fear. Jamaica has historically positioned itself as a champion of human rights, decolonial justice, and solidarity with oppressed peoples. Yet our treatment of Haitian migrants suggests a widening gap between our rhetoric and our reality.

International law is unequivocal. The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees clearly establishes the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits states from returning individuals to territories where their “life or freedom would be threatened.” Even though Jamaica does not yet have a fully developed domestic asylum framework, we are still bound by this fundamental rule through customary international law and through our commitments under various human rights treaties. Non-refoulement is not optional. It is a minimum humanitarian obligation.

It is understandable that Jamaica faces economic pressures, resource limitations, and immigration challenges. No reasonable person expects the country to absorb large, unmanaged inflows that exceed our capacity. However, compassion and legality do not require unlimited resources. They require proper screening, temporary protection where necessary, and coordinated engagement with bodies such as UNHCR, IOM, CARICOM, and international partners willing to assist. Turning back entire boatloads of desperate Haitians without meaningful evaluation is neither humane nor defensible.

Jamaica faces a defining choice: either to continue prioritising convenience over conscience, or reaffirm the principles of dignity, solidarity, and justice that we claim to champion. Our response to Haiti’s suffering will be remembered long after this crisis passes. Let us choose the path of compassion, legality, and regional responsibility. Jamaica must do better, our moral leadership depends on it.

FI WE CHILDREN FOUNDATION

info@fiwechildren.org