The Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) yesterday ruled in favour of the government of Trinidad and Tobago in a freedom of movement case, finding that in order for CARICOM citizens to exercise their rights, they must present a passport issued by a member state or a CARICOM passport as proof of their nationality.
This was the court’s finding in the case of Bain vs Trinidad, in which David Bain, a Grenadian-born United States (US) citizen, challenged Trinidad’s decision to deny him entry to the country, although he argued that as a Grenadian citizen, he was entitled to freedom of movement within the member states.
The CCJ found that the appropriate documentary evidence had not been presented, and as such, the claims against Trinidad and Tobago were dismissed, and the parties ordered to bear their own costs. A release from the CCJ explained that Bain, upon arrival in the country on December 14, 2017, presented himself as a US citizen, and produced only his US passport, as his Grenadian passport had expired years prior.
However, immigration officials at the Piarco International Airport questioned him over information received of a man bearing the same name who had a history of drug convictions. While Bain denied that he was ever convicted of any such crime, he was refused entry and sent back to Grenada on an early flight the next day, December 15, 2017.
The release related that Bain produced his Grenadian driver’s licence, which states that he is a Grenadian citizen, his Grenadian voter’s identification (ID) card, which states that he was born in Grenada, and his US passport, which lists Grenada as his country of birth.
The appellant argued that those documents, as was the case in Myrie vs State of Barbados, should be enough to invoke his right of freedom of movement within the region.
However, the court found that while he is a Grenadian citizen, the documents presented were insufficient to prove such to immigration officers.
The court ruled that both the driver’s licence and ID card were insufficient as they did not serve as evidence of citizenship, nor were they machine-readable or designed to be stamped by immigration officials.
Furthermore, they re-jected Bain’s argument that the notation in his US passport conclusively proves citizenship, as he could have renounced his citizenship or have had it stripped by the Grenadian government. Also, mere birth in a country does not always equate to citizenship, the release noted.
It was stated that the court also considered whether Bain had waived his right to freedom of movement as a Grenadian national when he presented his US passport. However, they noted that if someone with dual citizenship exercises their rights attached to one nationality, it does not eliminate their other nationality and the rights attached to that citizenship.
“Therefore, if Mr. Bain was denied entry based on his US passport, he could still claim his rights under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas if he could forthwith prove that he is Grenadian citizen,” it was stated.
According to the CCJ, as specified by CARICOM, the “appropriate travel document to invoke the right of freedom of movement is the CARICOM passport or a passport issued by a CARICOM Member State”. Further-more, they stated that the onus is on the person attempting to gain entry to a CARICOM member state to establish that they are a CARICOM national with the right to freedom of movement.
