Court backs PICA officer’s bid to fight years-long temporary status
Published:Friday | January 23, 2026 | 11:42 AMKimone Francis/Senior Staff Reporter
An immigration officer who has been employed in a temporary position by the Passport, Immigration and Citizenship Agency(PICA) since 2011 has been given the nod by the Supreme Court to challenge the entity’s decision not to appoint him permanently.
Justice Tania Mott Tulloch Reid made the ruling on Wednesday, following submissions by attorneys representing the officer, Kenton Senior, and PICA.
Senior is seeking several court orders, including a declaration that he is entitled to be appointed to a permanent position as an immigration officer within PICA under Staff Order 1.4.1.
He also wants a declaration that his continuous temporary appointment since 2016 is unlawful, irrational, and in breach of Staff Orders.
The immigration officer is asking the court to declare that he has a legitimate expectation to be made permanent given his long-term temporary service.
Further, he is seeking an order of mandamus compelling the PICA to appoint him permanently to the post.
Senior, through his attorney, Hugh Wildman, is arguing that he has been acting in a vacant immigration officer position (Level 5) since December 28, 2011.
He said he has received “excellent” appraisals and was praised in 2013 by the former CEO for his dedication and professionalism.
He said no reason has been provided for why he has not been appointed permanently despite his long tenure.
At the same time, he argued that the agency refused to hand over documents to the Public Service Commission, forcing him to submit the documents himself in 2023.
He said formal letters and appeals sent in 2023, 2024, and 2025 have reportedly not resulted in his appointment.
In his sworn affidavit, Senior said he sent a formal appeal to the Public Service Commission in February 2025, which the body acknowledged via text, stating the matter was referred to its Legal Services Unit.
Senior argued that the ongoing refusal to appoint him permanently necessitates court intervention to compel the PICA to act in accordance with the law.
“It is the refusal of the respondents therefore to have the applicant appointed that the applicant now seeks the relief of this court to compel the respondents to act in keeping with the law and have the Applicant appointed to the post of permanent immigration officer,” said Senior’s affidavit.
Four years ago, Senior publicly accused several senior officials at the agency of victimisation and levelled allegations of corruption against some officers at the state agency.
In a Gleaner interview at that time, Senior noted that his frustration had become unbearable and all avenues for redress had come up short.
He alleged that his troubles began at the agency after he defied a senior official’s orders to falsify the minutes of a meeting to reflect proceedings that did not happen while erasing the actual events.
The immigration officer said that that incident followed on the heels of his public refusal to support a fundraiser staged by a superior.
Since that time, he said his work life was thrown into a tailspin, with his seniors refusing to appoint him to a permanent position.
He claimed that he was the only immigration officer who remained in a temporary post despite his years of service and training of new employees.