A group of 64 Venezuelan migrants detained at the Chaguaramas Heliport has been granted conditional release pending the outcome of their lawsuit over their proposed deportation.
Delivering a decision yesterday afternoon, Justice Ricky Rahim ordered that the group be released on orders of supervision which will remain in place until their joint substantive lawsuit is eventually determined.
While the Immigration Division was also barred from executing the deportation orders against the group, Justice Rahim did not invalidate them (the orders).
The migrants were among a large group of fellow nationals who were detained for immigration offences at a nightclub in St James on July 8.
Two weeks ago, however, High Court Judge Avason Quinlan-Williams upheld a claim from six of the detainees in which they contended that they were unlawfully held at the location, which was officially designated as a quarantine facility for the COVID-19 pandemic but not as an immigration detention station.
Two days later, High Court Judge Frank Seepersad considered a similar application from another of the detainees.
However, Justice Seepersad did not order his release as his colleague did with the six others, as the case came up for hearing after National Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds issued the suggested declaration regarding the location. Justice Seepersad did rule that he would be entitled to compensation for his brief unlawful detention, which would be calculated at a later date.
In their application for judicial review, the group was mainly challenging the failure of National Security Minister Fitzgerald Hinds to place them on supervision orders so that they could complete their asylum seeker/refugee applications with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
In deciding that the group should be granted leave to pursue its substantive case, Justice Rahim noted that under the Immigration Act, the Chief Immigration Officer first considers whether detainees should be released on supervision orders pending deportation.
He noted that the National Security Minister, who is responsible for signing off on deportations, has the discretion to veto such supervision orders.
“The court, therefore, does not accept the argument that the duty lies at first with the Minister to consider whether an order of supervision must be made when making the deportation order,” he said.
Justice Rahim also rejected the detainees’ claims over the effect of the delayed designation of the facility on their continued detention.
“On the face of it, the argument that their continued detention is unlawful because they had been unlawfully detained prior to the designation is a wholly unmeritorious one, in that it is not sound in law and therefore holds no realistic prospect of success,” he said.
However, Justice Rahim did rule that they had raised a valid challenge over the failure of both parties to consider the supervision orders after deportation could not be quickly facilitated after their initial arrest.
“The court is therefore of the view that the applicants have demonstrated an arguable case with a realistic prospect of success that the period of detention has not been that which is reasonable for the purpose of detention and shall grant leave of this limb only,” Justice Rahim said.
In deciding on whether to grant an injunction ordering their conditional release pending the outcome of their UNHCR applications, Justice Rahim suggested that it (the injunction) should instead be related to the outcome of the substantive case.
“The applications before that body do not form part of domestic law and so to make such an order would, in effect, indirectly leapfrog over Parliament to impose a duty for the Minister and by extension to court to take into account the obligations of an unincorporated treaty,” Justice Rahim said.
He ruled that the balance of justice required the granting of the interim order, as he referenced evidence of the deplorable conditions at the facility and allegations of abuse towards detainees.
“The evidence in this case, should it be true, demonstrates nothing short of inhumane treatment towards some members of the group, and their circumstances of detention fall far short of what is to be expected to say the least,” Justice Rahim said.
“Not only is it likely to be harmful to the applicants but such actions may reflect adversely on the reputation of the nation on the international front,” he added.
The case, which was deemed urgent, was transferred to Justice Quinlan-Williams.
Justice Rahim’s ruling in the case was met with jubilation from dozens of the group’s relatives, who gathered outside the office of the law firm that represented them at Keate Street in Port-of-Spain.
In a brief interview with Guardian Media, attorney Blaine Sobrian, of Quantum Legal, described the outcome as a victory for humanity.
“When you look around and you see these women and children whose loved ones are separated from them, at least for the time being, we know that they will be given their freedom from the heliport, which is a significant development, and it shows that there are some considerations as regards the humanitarian side of this whole migrant crisis that we are experiencing in Trinidad and Tobago,” Sobrian said.
The migrants were also represented by Elton Prescott, SC, Criston J Williams and Shivanand Mohan.
Gregory Delzin, Vanessa Gopaul, Shalini Singh, Vincent Jardine and Avion Romain represented the State.
