EDITORIAL - Shanique Myrie's case raisesimportant question for CSME

JAMAICA SHOULD do more than contemplate taking the case of Shanique Myrie to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ). Kingston should proceed with the action.

For beyond the pain of a humiliating vaginal search and deportation that Ms Myrie claimed she was made to endure when she attempted to enter Barbados last month, there are other fundamental issues to be addressed regarding the operation of the single market and economy into which the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) proposes to the transform itself.

Not least of these is whether Jamaican nationals who travel to Barbados face xenophobic profiling, discrimination and denied benefits to be enjoyed arising from their country's membership in the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME).

While Ms Myrie's case appears to be the most egregious - at least she has been open about it - it appears not to be the only incident of the kind involving Jamaicans. Other persons have since come forward claiming indecent and humiliating body searches by immigration officials in Bridgetown and of being deported from that country.

Jamaicans, though, are not the only Caribbean nationals who feel unduly hassled in Barbados. Guyanese and Vincentians make the same claim.

A seamless market and economy, which is work in progress for the CSME, to which Jamaica and Barbados are signatories, presumes the free movement of labour and capital within that zone.

With regard to the CSME, the free movement of labour is the goal, the movement towards which has started with the 'free' movement of some categories of skilled people.

We do not know whether Ms Myrie falls within any of these categories which, in the circumstances, we believe matters little. For while she may not have had the right to residence or to work in Barbados, she, we believe - like citizens of countries that are signatories of the CSME - was within the boundaries of the law entitled to an expectation of hassle-free travel to and from Barbados. Indeed, such certainty, as well as fair and predictable application of the law to all persons, is important to the conduct of commerce and the creation of a seamless regional market and economy.

transcends the civil damage

In that regard, Ms Myrie's case, we feel, transcends the civil damage she may have suffered for abuse of her human rights into a critical incident relating to the administration of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.

That is why we welcome, without hubris, the suggestion from our own foreign minister, and apparently shared by Barbados, that the matter might have to be resolved at the CCJ.

Both sides, we believe, should agree to take these issues to the court for a declaration, rather than linger on binding negotiations. Such rulings will help to bring clarity to the operation of the regional integration and deepen it as a rules-based mechanism.

Ms Myrie - if Bridgetown denies liability and declines to compensate her - should perhaps sue civilly in the Barbadian courts.

If Barbados' immigration law purports to prohibit legal action by aggrieved foreign nationals in circumstances such as Ms Myrie's, it would be worthwhile for her to pursue the case, if required, all the way to the CCJ, in its criminal and civil jurisdiction of which Barbados, unlike Jamaica, is a member.

In either scenario, it is not only justice for a single individual that would be served, but also the regional integration process.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.