The decision by the United States to impose visa sanctions on government officials and their families on October 10 over the deportees issue, seems to have hit the administration with all the unexpected force of a cruise missile. Earlier that same day in his weekly post-Cabinet briefing, Dr Roger Luncheon had confidently informed the media corps of a Government decision to issue travel documents to 33 of the 141 persons the US was seeking to deport to Guyana, and had said that negotiations on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on the subject were ongoing. And the Ministry of Foreign Affairs responding to news of the sanctions said in a release that Minister Insanally had been under the impression that the proposals from Guyana concerning the 33 deportees contained in a note of October 5 had been acceptable to the US. So what went wrong?

The saga began when the US Department of Justice (DOJ) announced the imposition of sanctions on Guyana on September 7, because of the latter's refusal to accept more than 100 Guyanese nationals ordered deported from the United States. The action required the State Department to stop granting visas to local citizens unless the Government of Guyana accepted the repatriation of its nationals within 30 days - i.e. by October 6.

On September 11, we carried a report based on a telephone interview with an official of the DOJ, who claimed among other things that 90 cases had been pending for a year or more. On the following day, we published comments from Dr Luncheon on the matter, who alleged that the information provided by the US on the deportees was in some cases inaccurate and did not allow for quick verification, while delays were also being caused by the limited means at this country's disposal for confirming identity. He went on to advert to the complicating factor of the large number of Guyanese passports which were in the wrong hands, a figure which a senior government official when asked by this newspaper later put at around 25 per cent of those legitimately issued.

In the last week of September, we reported that perhaps one third of the 141 deportees involved could be sent back "by next week." That, in fact, did not happen, and three days before the deadline, Dr Luncheon informed reporters that the task force set up to speed up the verification process was now in the final stages of validating the identities of some 80 deportees.

On October 4, Foreign Minister Insanally stated that Guyana and the US were expected to sign a memorandum of understanding which would make provision for the rehabilitation/relocation of the 80 deportees, who would be returned over a period of five months. By the time that story appeared in this newspaper, we were already a day past the DOJ deadline. As related above, on the fifth of the month, a note was dispatched to the US Embassy in which it was indicated that 33 deportees were to be immediately repatriated.

There is no doubt that Guyana has legitimate concerns about accepting such a large number of deportees, concerns which have been publicised by both the Government and the media. That the United States does not appear to have been sensitive to those concerns is also clear. However, if it is true that as many as 90 deportee cases have been pending for a year or more, one has to ask the question as to whether the Guyana Government has approached the problem in the right way. Were they pursuing any serious negotiations on the matter during that year, or did they just employ stalling tactics? If the latter, then it is hardly surprising that the DOJ got exasperated.

In fact they have had longer than a year to pursue the question of an agreement of some kind. It might be remembered that the case of the deportees dumped here from Canada occurred as long ago as 1998, and yet no deportee arrangement reflective of even some of Guyana or Caricom's interests has appeared to be in the offing in the three years since. As it was the administration seems to have believed that an understanding satisfactory to Guyana could be reached in the space of a month, and more particularly while negotiating under the severe disadvantage of an ultimatum.

In any case, the administration should have known after September 11, that the US Government would most likely have very little tolerance for filibustering tactics on our part; they would just want alien criminals of whatever description out of the States.

Then there is the question of the negotiations themselves. After Guyana officials had made public that 80 deportees were to be repatriated in the immediate future, somehow or other we ended up with a figure of 33. The 80, we were now told, were to come over a period of five months. Is this what alarmed the DOJ? Were they afraid that nothing further might be done during the five months and then there would be still more delays after that? The very least that can be said is that even after the September 7 announcement from Justice, the Guyana Government showed no discernible enthusiasm for acting with dispatch.

There is too the matter of whether the Government engaged the DOJ in Washington. In addition to the local negotiations with the US Embassy (which is responsible to the State Department) over the MOU, was Ambassador Ishmael asked to keep in contact with the Department of Justice? One presumes that when the month's grace period was announced by the DOJ, a mechanism was triggered which allowed little time for manoeuvre and little room for concessions. Had Ambassador Ishmael been instructed to deal directly with Justice, perhaps the Government might have had some inkling of the urgency of the situation.

Finally, there is the issue of the difficulty of verifying identity in this country. Quite simply in this day and age it should not be a problem unless the relevant records are in a chaotic state. Considering that all governments since independence have generally been cavalier about record keeping that does not seem unlikely. It is something which the Ministry of Home Affairs will clearly have to address, and not just because of the deportees problem. In addition, if it is indeed the case that 25 per cent of legitimately issued passports fall into the wrong hands, that is unacceptable; we will have to move to tamper-proof passports, whatever the cost.

What Guyana cannot be held responsible for is the delays in those cases where the US has not provided copies of primary documentation, although exactly how many deportees fall into this category has not been revealed.

If the DOJ official to whom this newspaper spoke is correct, Guyana has been selected as the first country to be sanctioned over deportees by the withholding of visas. The Government should take note.