Privy Council reserves decision in Venezuelans' fight against deportation

FIVE Privy Council judges have reserved their decision on an urgent appeal brought by a Venezuelan woman and her son who are challenging the dismissal of their case in the local appellate courts, against their detention and deportation.

On Thursday, Lords Reed, Kitchin, Hamblen, Stephens and Lloyd-Jones heard from attorneys for the duo, Gerald Ramdeen and Tom Richards, and lead counsel for the State’s team, Peter Knox, QC.

In February, the mother and son were granted special leave by the Privy Council which ordered an emergency hearing.

When they entered TT in November 2020, the two were part of a larger group of 20 or so Venezuelans who breached TT’s then-closed border policy as specified in covid19 regulations in force at the time.

They were escorted out of TT by the Coast Guard but returned days later. They were held again and detained in quarantine and then on a deportation order.

The mother, who filed the application on behalf of her son who is a minor, also filed a constitutional motion contesting the deportation. A deportation order was issued for her alone, but it was argued by the State that the order also covered her child.

The two also received interim injunctions which prohibited the State from removing them from Trinidad at this time.

The Court of Appeal last July, dismissed the mother and son’s challenge of their detention because a deportation order was issued for their return to Venezuela.

The deportation order was stayed by Justice Avason Quinlan-Williams. The mother and son have been detained at the Chaguaramas Heliport since November 2020.

Another judge, Justice Margaret Mohammed, held there was a lawful basis for their detention since the Minister of National Security issued a valid deportation order. Mohammed refused to order their release.

The Court of Appeal had to determine whether the two were entitled to be released under a writ of habeas corpus and if their detention for an indefinite period was unreasonable and unlawful.

In their ruling, Justices of Appeal Prakash Moosai, Gillian Lucky and Mira Dean-Armorer held that the Immigration Act clearly provided a scheme for the detention of prohibited people pending deportation, and after making the order, the minister was empowered to issue a warrant of arrest for the person in question.

The minister was also empowered to make an order of detention, Dean-Armorer wrote in delivering the unanimous decision.

The Court of Appeal also pointed out that if the motion was dismissed, the two must be available to be deported, but their release may result in their absconding, frustrating the valid deportation order.

After their loss in the appeal court, attorneys for the two applied for conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council but this was dismissed last September by Justices Nolan Bereaux and Maria Wilson.

They then petitioned the Privy Council directly for special leave which was granted.

In submissions on Thursday, attorneys for the duo said there was never any basis for the child’s detention. They argued the boy was unlawfully detained for 14 months and should be released as any further period of detention would be unreasonable.

Also appearing for the State are Senior Counsel Fyard Hosein while the mother and son are also represented by attorneys Umesh Maharaj and Dayadai Harripaul.