- Jamaica received its first group of 22 third-country nationals from the United States on October thirteenth.
- The agreement caps transfers at 25 people per fortnight, with the IOM managing care and onward travel.
- The government has not published the agreement or a transfer schedule for future arrivals.
(KINGSTON, JAMAICA) — Jamaica received its first group of 22 third-country nationals from the United States on Tuesday, October 13, beginning operations under a bilateral arrangement that makes the island a temporary transit point for migrants being returned to their countries of origin or transferred elsewhere.
The group, which included seven women, arrived at Norman Manley International Airport in Kingston. Jamaican authorities processed the adults at the airport, then transported them by bus under police escort to an undisclosed location.
The arrival puts into effect a Memorandum of Understanding signed by Jamaica and the United States earlier in 2026. The governments have finalized procedures for the arrangement, which Jamaica describes as temporary transit rather than resettlement.
Caps and Conditions of the Agreement
Under the terms announced by the Jamaican government, the United States may transfer no more than 25 third-country nationals during any two-week period. The first group of 22 fell below that limit.
Jamaican Foreign Minister Kamina Johnson Smith has said the people covered by the agreement are not Jamaican deportees and are not being admitted to settle on the island. They are nationals of other countries who entered or remained in the United States unlawfully and are being removed through a process involving the International Organization for Migration.
The Jamaican government says its role will chiefly involve receiving arrivals and transporting them to the IOM. The organization will oversee accommodation, care and onward movement, with the United States funding the arrangement rather than Jamaica’s public budget.
The official aim is to return each person to their country of origin through the IOM’s Assisted Voluntary Return program or arrange a transfer to another country willing to receive them. The IOM has been engaged to provide support services and arrange travel.
90-Day Landing Status and Secrecy Around Arrivals
The first group was expected to receive temporary 90-day landing status. That status is intended to support the transit process, not provide a route to permanent residence.
Authorities have not released the group’s identities, nationalities or individual immigration histories. Local reporting indicated that the first cohort consisted largely of South American nationals, but officials have not published a complete manifest or disclosed where the group is staying.
The agreement excludes people with criminal antecedents, according to government announcements. Officials have not publicly provided a detailed definition of the term.
Another condition allows the program to be suspended if 10 third-country nationals apply to remain in Jamaica through asylum procedures or other humanitarian processes. The government has not publicly explained how a suspension would affect people already on the island or pending applications.
The arrangement also limits the number of arrivals to 25 per fortnight, a cap the government says is intended to account for capacity and allow authorities and the IOM to manage transfers. It has not announced a total quota or published a full transfer schedule beyond the first arrival.
The IOM’s Central Role in the Next Stage
The IOM’s role places the organization at the center of the next stage after U.S. removal. Its Assisted Voluntary Return program helps migrants return to their countries of origin through travel arrangements, documentation assistance and reintegration support. In Jamaica, the organization is expected to work on return or onward-transfer plans while people remain on the island.
The term “assisted voluntary return” describes the IOM-supported process, but the people arriving in Jamaica have been transferred following U.S. immigration enforcement proceedings. The U.S. removal decision provides the basis for their transfer; the IOM is responsible for helping arrange the next stage.
Questions about protection claims, family unity, medical needs and travel documentation can affect whether someone can be sent to a particular country. The public details released by the government do not set out the legal review before onward travel or identify an independent complaint process for migrants in Jamaica.
Opposition Demands Transparency and Parliamentary Review
The People’s National Party has called for the full text of the MOU and its operating procedures to be tabled in Parliament. Opposition spokesperson Fitz Jackson said Jamaicans were being asked to accept a security arrangement without access to the agreement.
Jackson has sought disclosure of the MOU, the schedule and frequency of future transfers, accommodation and security conditions, legal liabilities Jamaica may assume, and the agencies responsible for monitoring migrants. He has also called for details on contingency plans if a country refuses to accept someone and on procedures for asylum and humanitarian applications.
Senator Donna Scott-Mottley has criticized the government’s announcement of numerical limits and a suspension trigger without publication of the agreement. The opposition has also questioned whether Parliament should have been consulted before the arrangement became operational.
Johnson Smith has defended the deal, saying the government negotiated protections for Jamaica and its people. She has said there is nothing prejudicial to Jamaica in the agreement, while acknowledging that the United States has not agreed to make the document public.
The government says the program is controlled, funded by the United States and supported by an international organization. Opposition figures argue that those assurances do not replace public access to the agreement, particularly after the first group arrived.
Part of a Wider U.S. Transit Strategy
The arrangement forms part of a wider U.S. effort to establish removal and transit partnerships beyond American territory. Similar third-country arrangements have been associated with Liberia, Eswatini and Paraguay.
Such agreements allow the United States to move some people away from its territory while arranging return to another country. Supporters argue that the arrangements expand removal capacity and provide a process for cases in which direct repatriation is delayed.
Opponents say the approach can divide responsibility among several governments and organizations. A person may be removed by U.S. authorities, received by Jamaica, assisted by the IOM and ultimately sent to another country, with questions at each stage about identity checks, medical care, access to legal advice and protection from return to danger.
If someone becomes ill, cannot obtain travel documents or is refused by a proposed receiving country, responsibility could depend on provisions in the undisclosed MOU and finalized procedures. The governments have not published those documents.
Government Assurances and Unanswered Questions
The Jamaican government has said the arrangement will not be paid for from public funds and that the island is not opening its borders to uncontrolled migration. It has also cited the cap, the exclusion of people with criminal antecedents and the IOM’s responsibility for care and onward travel.
The first arrival has put those arrangements into practice. The group left U.S. custody and entered a country with which its members may have no prior connection, while their accommodation and return arrangements fall under the IOM rather than ordinary Jamaican immigration channels.
The number of people involved remains subject to the announced cap, but officials have not released a schedule for subsequent transfers. The first group’s onward travel will depend on arrangements to return them home or secure acceptance by another country.
Jamaica has now joined a system in which migrants removed from the United States are temporarily received by a country that is neither their destination nor, in most cases, their country of nationality. The duration of their stay, the destination of their next journey and the practical operation of the safeguards will unfold under procedures the government has not made public.
