By FARRAH JOHNSON

Tribune Staff Reporter

fjohnson@tribunemedia.net

THE government has been ordered to prove it acted lawfully when officials detained a group of asylum seekers who sought to take refuge in the country after fleeing Cameroon over fear of persecution.

Last year, Human Rights Bahamas accused the Department of Immigration of “illegally detaining” the asylum seekers, who according to the activist organisation, “fled a violent sectarian conflict in Cameroon where they were targeted as members of a minority group”.

The watchdog group claimed the detainees had not been charged with nor convicted of any crime in The Bahamas and argued the government had no legal justification for holding them indefinitely. The group also said all of the asylum seekers were interviewed by the United Nations High Commission on Refugees (UNHCR) and were in the process of having their political refugee status officially confirmed. 

Yesterday, a Supreme Court judge granted the attorneys representing the detainees leave to issue a writ of habeas corpus against Attorney General Carl Bethel, Immigration Minister Elsworth Johnson, Immigration Director Clarence Russel and Peter Joseph, the officer in charge of the Carmichael Detention Centre.

Justice Bernard Turner’s order said the respondents have until April 7 to file a return explaining the reasons the applicants have been detained for nearly two years and proving why they should not be released immediately. He also said none of the respondents, or a person or agency acting on their behalf, would be allowed to deport, expel, remove or repatriate any of the applicants from the country until the matter was completed or a further order was issued.

Calendars & Co filed the action on the grounds the government continued to “falsely imprison” the asylum seekers in breach of their constitutional rights.

The law firm recently filed the affidavit of Wislande Geffrard, a legal assistant of the chamber, who stated that Fred Smith, QC, in December 2020, wrote to Foreign Affairs Minister Darren Henfield and National Security Minister Marvin Dames to request the “urgent release of the applicants”.

“The respondents did not respond to the letter sent by Mr Smith but they published a press release indicating that once they have ‘completed the screening process and agree the criteria have been met, the government would then move to grant asylum status or (assist the asylum seeker to find a more appropriate third state in which to obtain that status),’” the court documents read. 

“I am advised by the applicants’ attorneys that where the liberty of the person is in question, there must be the ‘strictest compliance with the law’ and that holding someone in custody while investigations are ongoing is unlawful. I am also advised that administrative arrests are unlawful and seeking refugee status is not a criminal offence and therefore not a lawful reason for keeping them in custody.”

Mr Geffrard said the applicants travelled to The Bahamas with “very little clothing and have been rotating their clothing and underwear since May 2019.” He also stated the detainees have relatives in America who were willing to assist them financially until a decision was made on their refugee applications. He said these facts proved the detainees would not be a “burden on the state” if they were released.

Last year, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs released a statement asserting the government was satisfied the rights of detainees had not been violated. At the time, they also said the COVID-19 pandemic had hampered the repatriation of detainees to their home countries as well as the processing of asylum seekers. 

“The processing of asylum seekers by both the government and the UNHCR has been impacted by pandemic related challenges,” the statement read. “The government and the UNHCR have remained in close contact during this period in order to complete the process of screening, and the UNHCR representative visited the Detention Centre on several occasions and made no reports of violations to the government. 

“The government is satisfied that at no time have the rights of any detainees been violated. It is further satisfied that there has been full compliance with established protocols, as well as with both international law and domestic law.”