Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All

Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families

Fortieth session

Summary record of the 596th meeting

Held at the Palais Wilson, Geneva, on Wednesday, 9 April 2025, at 3 p.m.

Chair:Ms. Diallo

Contents

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 73 of the Convention (continued)

Examination of the implementation of the Convention by Jamaica in the absence of a report

The meeting was called to order at 3 p.m.

Consideration of reports submitted by States Parties under article 73 of the Convention (continued)

Examination of the implementation of the Convention by Jamaica in the absence of a report (CMW/C/JAM/QPR/1-2)

At the invitation of the Chair, the delegation of Jamaica joined the meeting.

The Chair said that meeting participants would first be shown a video statement made by the State Party’s Minister of Labour and Social Security.

A representative of Jamaica, in a pre-recorded video statement, said that his country’s commitment to upholding the rights and dignity of migrant workers and the members of their families was unwavering. Jamaican nationals made immense contributions to economies worldwide, while that migrant workers from elsewhere played an important role in the development of Jamaica. Migration had long been an integral part of the Jamaican national experience, and policies that promoted safe, orderly and regular migration remained a government priority.

Migration, properly managed, drove economic growth, enhanced social cohesion and contributed to sustainable development. His Government continued to work tirelessly to ensure that all workers could thrive in an environment free from discrimination, exploitation and marginalization. Over the years, Jamaica had taken meaningful steps to strengthen its migration governance framework through legislative reforms, policy development and programmatic interventions. The authorities collaborated closely with international partners, regional institutions and civil society to manage migration in a way that safeguarded human rights, promoted socioeconomic development and fostered regional cooperation.

Several policy initiatives and programmes had been introduced to ensure that migrant workers were protected and treated fairly, particularly in the areas of labour mobility, social protection and protection from exploitation. Long-standing bilateral labour agreements were maintained with countries such as the United States of America, Canada and the United Kingdom. The annual employment of thousands of Jamaican workers, particularly in agriculture, construction and hospitality, was facilitated by those agreements, which were routinely reviewed to improve working conditions, ensure fair wages and secure access to social benefits. Pre-departure training programmes had been enhanced to ensure that Jamaican migrant workers were aware of their rights and responsibilities, and the authorities engaged continuously with their counterparts in host countries to address issues of concern to Jamaican workers.

Jamaica was also home to a growing number of migrant workers, primarily from the Caribbean. They worked chiefly in agriculture, education, healthcare and tourism. Those workers were afforded core protections under the country’s labour laws. Efforts to streamline the issuance of work permits were under way.

No forms of exploitation, including trafficking in persons, were tolerated, and systems to identify and prevent exploitative labour practices had been strengthened. Training had been expanded to improve immigration and law enforcement officials’ capacity to respond to cases of trafficking in persons, including migrant workers.

Despite the progress that had been made, access to social protection for all migrant workers, regardless of their status, still had to be expanded. Data collection and coordination, too, had to be strengthened, not least to improve policy responses to migration trends. At all events, his Government remained committed to enhancing bilateral and regional cooperation, combating exploitation and trafficking in persons and engaging with international mechanisms, including the Committee.

A representative of Jamaica, noting that her delegation appreciated the Committee’s patience regarding the regrettable delay in the submission of her country’s combined initial and second periodic reports, said that every effort would be made to ensure that the reports were submitted by 10 a.m. the following morning.

Ms. Dzumhur (Country Rapporteur) said that the State Party’s combined initial and second periodic reports had been expected three years earlier. If the reports were not submitted on time, the concluding observations to be adopted by the Committee would touch only on the issues that were raised in the dialogue with the delegation.

She wished to know how the implementation of Vision 2030 Jamaica, the State Party’s national development plan, would improve the situation of migrants, including Jamaican nationals living and working abroad and migrants in Jamaica. She wished to know, too, what steps had been taken in follow-up to the Medium Term Socio-Economic Policy Framework 2021–2024. In addition, she wondered whether any updates or other changes had been made to the National Diaspora Policy adopted in 2019 and whether any new strategies, action plans or policy documents related to the fight against trafficking in persons had been adopted.

She welcomed the State Party’s participation in the recent regional review of the implementation of the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration but wondered why it had not submitted any voluntary input to contribute to the review. She wondered, too, what plans the State Party had made to ratify other international instruments related to migration, in particular the relevant conventions of the International Labour Organization (ILO).

It would be helpful to learn how many migrants, including both documented and undocumented migrants, were living in the State Party and where they came from. It would also be interesting to learn whether progress towards the establishment of a national human rights institution had been made, whether training to familiarize relevant officials, in particular police officers and immigration officials, with the Convention had been organized and to what extent the authorities cooperated with civil society organizations dealing with migration issues. In that respect, she wondered whether there was a forum for ongoing consultations with civil society on the development of legislative and other measures related to migration.

She wished to know whether the courts had cleared their backlog of cases, whether migrants who were parties to legal proceedings were provided with legal and other forms of assistance, what was done to protect and support the victims of trafficking in persons, whether there had been any cases involving the sale of children and, if so, whether the perpetrators had been brought to justice. She wished to know, too, whether the authorities detained migrants who, though still in international waters, were approaching the State Party aboard small vessels, whether such persons were subjected to collective expulsion and what could be done to improve the situation of migrants from Cuba, most of whom arrived by sea. In addition, she would welcome a description of the process of applying for asylum in the State Party and of the measures taken to protect asylum-seekers.

Turning to the issue of exploitation, she said that she wondered whether undocumented migrants could be given official leave to work, whether employers exploited such workers’ lack of documentation to underpay them and to what extent labour inspectors intervened in cases involving the employment of undocumented migrants. She wondered, too, whether such workers could transfer money home to their countries of origin.

Mr. Kariyawasam (Country Rapporteur) said that he would welcome more information on the State Party’s bilateral agreements with such countries as the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. He wished to know in particular whether a rights-based approach was taken in those agreements. He also wished to know what sort of diplomatic and consular representation the State Party had in those and other countries, what particular challenges Jamaican nationals living and working abroad faced and what action was being taken to address them. In that connection, it would be useful to learn whether legal support and consular or repatriation assistance were offered and what was done to collect population data in Jamaican communities abroad.

As the State Party had a thriving service sector, it had begun receiving migrant workers, some of them undocumented. He wondered to what extent such workers were effectively afforded the protection to which they were entitled under the Convention and whether any plans had been made to bring the Aliens Act (1946) and other relevant laws, under which migrants from Cuba and Haiti were reportedly detained without due process of law, into line with modern standards.

He wished to know whether children of migrants in an irregular situation had access to education and healthcare and, if not, why that was the case. He wished to know, too, whether the Government followed the advice of civil society organizations in its response to the arrival of migrants fleeing Haiti and Cuba in search of work and what measures it took to ensure that such migrants were not exploited by their employers in the hotel industry.

Mr. Frasheri (Country Rapporteur) said that he wished to learn about any specific difficulties encountered by the State Party in implementing or enforcing the Convention, any areas in which it needed to build capacity in order to be able to enforce provisions of the Convention and any assistance that it would like to receive from the Committee in terms of capacity-building or training on the Convention.

Mr. Oumaria (Country Rapporteur) said that he would appreciate information on the protections provided to Jamaican migrant workers, including domestic workers, by the State Party’s consulates; on the policies in place to support the return and reintegration of Jamaican migrant workers; and on the difficulties encountered by such workers in their main countries of destination, including the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. He wished to know whether a national human rights institution had been established and, if so, whether its mandate included the protection of migrant workers and whether it had been accredited by the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions.

Mr. Ceriani Cernadas said that he would like to find out whether the State Party planned to amend the Aliens Act and the Immigration Restriction (Commonwealth Citizens) Act to bring provisions that were inconsistent with the Convention and other instruments ratified by the State Party – such as those that treated women as men’s dependents, made disability a basis for barring a person’s immigration and criminalized immigration offences – into line with those instruments. He wished to know how the State Party was handling the significant increase in the number of Haitian migrants fleeing the various crises in their country and arriving in Jamaica. He would appreciate comments from the delegation on reports of cases in which Haitian migrants had been returned by the Ministry of National Security, families had been held in detention centres and irregular migration by Haitians had been characterized in public discourse as a threat to national security. He wondered whether any initiatives were being undertaken within the framework of the Caribbean Community or the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States to create opportunities for labour migration for persons from Haiti.

He wished to know what measures were in place, including under the National Diaspora Policy, to protect Jamaican migrants abroad. Given the increasing number of deportations being carried out by the United States, he wished to know what the State Party’s consulates were doing to help its nationals in that country. He would also like to know whether any measures were in place to help victims or victims’ families to benefit from the Windrush compensation scheme in the United Kingdom.

Mr. Ünver said that he wished to know what the grounds had been for the reported deportation of 55 Jamaican nationals from the United States in February 2025, whether the State Party expected the United States to deport more of its nationals and what impact such deportations were having, including psychologically, on the sizeable Jamaican community in the United States.

Mr. Babacar said that he welcomed the State Party’s ratification of 8 of the 10 fundamental ILO conventions. He wished to know whether the State Party intended to ratify the ILO Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 1981 (No. 155), and the ILO Promotional Framework for Occupational Safety and Health Convention, 2006 (No. 187). He wondered whether a labour inspectorate was in place and, if so, whether it operated throughout the country and was allocated sufficient resources to carry out its duties.

In the light of the concerns regarding discrimination against certain groups that the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination had raised in its concluding observations on the State Party’s combined twenty-first to twenty-fourth periodic reports to that committee (CERD/C/JAM/CO/21-24), which he had had to consult in the absence of a report to his own Committee, he wished to know what steps the State Party was taking to prevent any discrimination against migrant workers. He would also like to find out how the State Party ensured equality of remuneration between migrant and Jamaican workers, in application of the ILO Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), which the State Party had ratified.

Mr. Corzo Sosa said that, in addition to the concluding observations issued in 2022 by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, concluding observations had been issued in 2023 by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women with regard to the State Party’s eighth periodic report (CEDAW/C/JAM/CO/8). In both cases, the State Party had submitted reports on which the committees could base their concluding observations and had a practice of regularly submitting reports to those committees. It was therefore all the more curious that, when it came to the Committee on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the State Party had for the second time failed to submit a report.

Under articles 73 and 74 of the Convention, States Parties must submit reports for examination by the Committee. However, the Committee could not examine something that it did not have. In the absence of a report, the Committee was forced to base its questions during the constructive dialogue on other information, including information received from sources other than the State Party. Furthermore, the failure to submit a report violated not only an obligation under the Convention, but also the public’s right, under article 73, to information on the State’s compliance with its international obligations. Such a right to information was also highlighted in article 33 of the Convention.

In connection with certain concerns raised by the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in its concluding observations, he wished to know whether any national legislation had been enacted on the protection of asylum-seekers and refugees and whether any measures had been adopted to eradicate statelessness in the State Party.

Mr. Taghi-Zada said that he would be interested to know how many Jamaican nationals were currently working abroad and to what extent they had access to consular services. In particular, he wondered whether Jamaican migrant workers in other countries were able to vote in Jamaican elections.

Ms. Gahar said that she would welcome information on the provision of legal assistance to children in conflict with the law, including children of migrant workers, unaccompanied children and separated children. She would like to know whether the State Party applied alternatives to detention for such children, and whether it monitored and collected data on their social reintegration.

Furthermore, she would be interested to know how the State Party protected the right to health of children of migrant workers and unaccompanied and separated children. She wished to know whether the JamStats database of the Planning Institute of Jamaica included data on the children of migrants, including in respect of specific indicators such as birth registration and immunization.

Lastly, recalling that the State Party had participated in the ILO campaign “Red Card to Child Labour”, she said that she was curious to know whether the State Party had any information on children of migrant workers who might have been forced into agricultural labour in rural areas. She would be grateful if the State Party could provide statistics, disaggregated by age and sex, on the economic exploitation of children of migrants, unaccompanied children and separated children.

The Chair said that she, too, regretted the absence of the State Party’s combined initial and second periodic reports, which represented a missed opportunity to discuss the implementation of the Convention in greater depth and meant that the Committee would be obliged to ask the delegation general questions that could have been dealt with in the report. Moreover, the State Party’s common core document (HRI/CORE/1/Add.82) dated back to 1997, meaning that much of the information it contained on the economic and social situation and the country’s legal and political framework was out of date.

The Committee would be interested to know the status of the Convention in the State Party’s hierarchy of norms and whether the Convention had been invoked in judgments handed down by courts of Jamaica or of the Caribbean Community. If so, it would like to know how case law concerning the Convention or the rights of migrant workers had affected the development of the country’s legal order and its migration policies. It would also be useful to know what guarantees of access to justice were afforded to migrant workers and whether they had access to the courts on an equal basis with nationals.

She would like to know whether the bilateral labour agreements that Jamaica had entered into with Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States provided for the protection of the human rights of migrant workers and, if so, what practical steps had been taken to ensure that the agreements’ human rights provisions were observed. For example, did the agreements provide for a monitoring mechanism to ensure that the parties respected human rights? As the Committee had received reports of serious infringements of the rights of migrant workers during the implementation of the bilateral agreements, she wondered whether it would be possible to review them.

Regarding the challenge of expanding access to social protection for all migrant workers, she would appreciate clarification regarding the scope of the social protection measures that were currently available to them. She would be grateful if the delegation could describe in greater detail the nature of the challenges facing the State Party and indicate the specific groups of migrant workers who were most affected by or vulnerable to a lack of access to social protection. She would be interested to know what mechanisms and strategies the State Party had established to facilitate access to social protection for informal workers, including both nationals and migrants, in sectors such as domestic work and agriculture. She wondered what efforts the State Party was making to protect seasonal migrant workers, domestic migrant workers and agricultural migrant workers.

The meeting was suspended at 4.25 p.m. and resumed at 4.55 p.m.

A representative of Jamaica said that, as Jamaica was a dualist State, the Convention did not automatically form part of its domestic legal order. Rather, the Convention had been incorporated into the domestic legal order through various pieces of legislation, including the Employment Agencies Regulation Act, the Foreign Nationals and Commonwealth Citizens (Employment) Act and the Trafficking in Persons (Prevention, Suppression and Punishment) Act. Other domestic legislation that gave effect to the provisions of the Convention included the Employment (Termination and Redundancy Payments) Act, the Employment (Equal Pay for Men and Women) Act, the Maternity Leave Act and the Disabilities Act. Although the Convention was not directly mentioned in the country’s legal system, the authorities had conducted public information campaigns about the various human rights treaties that had been ratified by Jamaica.

A representative of Jamaica said that Jamaica had ratified the ILO Domestic Workers Convention, 2011 (No. 189) and the Government was currently working to amend the Employment (Termination and Redundancy Payments) Act and the Minimum Wage Act to bring them into line with that Convention. The Employment (Termination and Redundancy Payments) Act protected employees by setting standards for termination of employment, including notice requirements, redundancy payments and fair treatment and compensation.

The Ministry of Labour and Social Security employed a cadre of labour inspectors whose task was to ensure that employers throughout the country adhered to the Minimum Wage Act and the Employment (Termination and Redundancy Payments) Act. The provisions of those laws applied equally to Jamaican and migrant workers, and employers that failed to abide by them could be taken to court.

A representative of Jamaica said she regretted that the report had not been submitted on time; the Government would endeavour to ensure that the situation did not arise again. Different ministries were responsible for the preparation and submission of reports to the human rights treaty bodies, depending on the subject matter of the treaty. Efforts to update the common core document had been entrusted to the newly established Ministry of Legal and Constitutional Affairs, which had been given overall responsibility for human rights.

The Government remained committed to the development of a national human rights institution. Although such a mechanism was not yet in place, Jamaica had several independent entities that were responsible for promoting and protecting human rights, including the Office of the Children’s Advocate, the Independent Commission of Investigations and the Office of the Public Defender, each of which played a critical role in safeguarding the rights of Jamaicans and migrant workers across various sectors.

A regulatory framework for money transfers and remittances was in place. Specifically, the activities of remittance service providers were regulated by section 22G of the Bank of Jamaica Act, which ensured that only government-authorized entities could operate as money transfer and remittance agents. Remittance services were provided at strategic locations throughout the island, ensuring that remittances could be sent from and to the country by foreign migrant workers in Jamaica and Jamaican migrant workers abroad.

A representative of Jamaica said that the Government, in keeping with its sovereign right to regulate and protect the borders of Jamaica, was not currently planning to decriminalize irregular migration. All persons who entered the country in an irregular manner were afforded all due process safeguards as set out in the Constitution.

A representative of Jamaica said that certain provisions of ILO Conventions No. 155 and No. 187 had been taken into consideration during the preparation of new occupational safety and health legislation. The Government would consider ratifying those conventions once the legislation had passed. In addition, the Factories Act and its attendant regulations protected the health and safety of factory workers.

Jamaica had ratified the ILO Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), excluding part II on labour inspection in commerce. Notwithstanding that exclusion, the labour inspectorate conducted visits to commercial workplaces to ensure their compliance with various labour laws. The Government was currently reviewing the Labour Officers (Powers) Act with a view to its amendment and, during that process, would put forward a recommendation to ratify part II of ILO Convention No. 81. Moreover, the Government, with the support of ILO, was in the process of completing a gap analysis regarding the ILO Violence and Harassment Convention, 2019 (No. 190) and had held tripartite meetings to chart the way forward for its ratification.

A representative of Jamaica said that the National Diaspora Policy of 2019 had been updated in 2022 and the Government had hired a consultant to develop a plan of action. A new medium-term socioeconomic policy framework for the period 2024–2027 was currently being finalized and would be sent to the Cabinet for approval.

A representative of Jamaica said that the Government had been working to amend various pieces of outdated legislation to bring them into conformity with the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. In 2023, it had introduced a paternity leave policy under which male public sector employees with at least 12 months of continuous service, including full-time employees and part-time employees who worked at least 18 hours per week, were entitled to 20 days of paid leave. The Government was encouraging private sector employers to also offer paid paternity leave.

A representative of Jamaica said that, in response to the backlog of cases before the courts, including cases in relation to migrant workers and trafficking in persons, the Court Administration Division had launched a recruitment drive with a view to attracting and retaining judges. The push to clear the backlog also included the digitalization of the court system to make it more efficient.

A representative of Jamaica said that the National Policy on International Migration and Development was informed by the perspectives of several civil society organizations. Aspects of the policy to which civil society had contributed included the strengthening of human and technological resources in the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, the development of a policy for the retention of skilled labour, the development of a strategy to encourage migrant workers to make voluntary contributions to the national insurance scheme, the use of standardized data in developing labour migration programmes and the implementation of systems to facilitate the portability of employment benefits, including pensions.

Civil society organizations had contributed to the strengthening of legislation, policy and the regulatory framework for managing labour migration at the national and international levels. They helped to improve migrant workers’ access to benefits in some host countries and played a very active role in the reintegration of involuntarily returned migrants, including by collecting data and providing migrants with access to social services. They also tried to reunite them with their families and provide them with shelter, medical care and assistance in finding employment.

A representative of Jamaica said that a bill had been drafted on the amendment of certain sections of the Constitution relating to the treatment of different categories of non‑nationals. The amendments would remove the distinction between Commonwealth citizens and other persons classified as aliens, thereby ensuring that all non-nationals would be classified as aliens and be subject to the Aliens Act. The Government was undertaking a comprehensive review of all laws on immigration to ensure that they were in compliance with current international standards.

A representative of Jamaica said that the Government had made public outreach efforts to identify Jamaican migrants to the United Kingdom whose right to reside in that country had been violated. Persons eligible for compensation under the Windrush compensation scheme established by the Government of the United Kingdom had been referred to that Government.

A representative of Jamaica said that the Diaspora and Consular Affairs Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade was mandated to deliver consular services to Jamaican nationals, irrespective of their migration status and country of residence. The Government’s network of embassies, high commissions and consulates general, along with over 90 honorary consuls, made every effort to ensure that Jamaicans arrested or detained overseas received non-judgmental and professional support. In that connection, consular officers notified the families of arrested or detained persons, gathered information about the status of their cases and local judicial and prison systems, provided families with lists of local lawyers and arranged for consular visits to detention centres or prisons, where possible. They also facilitated the transfer of funds to detained persons, ensured that such persons’ medical problems were brought to the attention of prison authorities, addressed any justified complaints of ill-treatment or discrimination and facilitated the repatriation of detained persons after their release.

Honorary consuls provided assistance to Jamaican nationals living in countries where Jamaica had no diplomatic representation. Efforts were being made to expand the network of honorary consuls, particularly in cities where significant numbers of Jamaicans lived. The Government collaborated with international organizations such as the International Organization for Migration and ILO to provide legal aid, shelter, repatriation assistance and other forms of support to Jamaican nationals living overseas. It also worked closely with non‑State actors, particularly civil society organizations, faith-based organizations and diaspora networks that operated in countries where Jamaica lacked diplomatic representation.

A representative of Jamaica said that the Government did not carry out collective expulsions of regular or irregular migrant workers of any nationality. There was no evidence of systematic arbitrary detention of migrant workers and their families in Jamaica. Detention was not used as a punitive measure for irregular entry; rather, it was applied in limited circumstances in order to facilitate lawful processing or removal. Any deprivation of liberty must be carried out in accordance with due process and was subject to judicial oversight. The Government acknowledged that parts of the Aliens Act were out of date and was reviewing the Act to bring it into compliance with international standards.

A representative of Jamaica said that Jamaica had bilateral working arrangements on labour migration with Canada and the United States, but no bilateral agreement as such with the United Kingdom. The memorandum of understanding with Canada establishing the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program set out guidelines and principles relating to wages, accommodation and the general treatment of workers. For example, it provided that workers and employers must sign an employment contract setting out the period of employment and the conditions relating to accommodation, meals, rest periods, wages, health and safety provisions and the obligation of employers to maintain employment records.

To ensure that Jamaican workers’ rights were respected, the Government had set up liaison offices in Toronto, Nova Scotia, Leamington and British Columbia, the areas with the largest concentrations of Jamaican workers. Liaison officers were also stationed in other parts of Canada. All workers were given the contact details of a liaison officer when they left Jamaica. The primary role of liaison officers was to ensure the welfare and protection of all Jamaican workers. They conducted unannounced visits to farms, monitored the working conditions of Jamaican workers and mediated in disputes between workers and employers. Every year, representatives of the Governments of Canada and the Caribbean countries participating in the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program held a meeting to review the memorandum of understanding and discuss the terms and conditions applicable to workers.

Ms. Dzumhur said that she wished to know how undocumented migrants who approached Jamaica by boat, particularly from Cuba, were returned. She would welcome information on the places where undocumented migrants in Jamaica were detained and the authorities that managed those places. It was still not clear whether undocumented child migrants were detained in separate facilities from their parents and, if so, whether they were able to communicate with them.

She wondered whether children born in Jamaica to undocumented parents were granted citizenship and access to education. It would be interesting to know whether migrants had access to legal aid and, if so, what organizations or agencies were responsible for providing it. She would be grateful to know how many Jamaican nationals were working abroad, whether any mechanisms for communicating with the Jamaican diaspora had been established and how Jamaicans who returned to Jamaica were reintegrated into society.

Mr. Kariyawasam said that he wished to know what measures were taken to facilitate the reintegration of voluntary returnees, such as those who returned to Jamaica upon retirement, and to provide assistance to Jamaicans who had been expelled from another country. It would be interesting to know whether any particular institution was responsible for assisting returnees and, if so, what forms of assistance were provided to promote their reintegration.

He would appreciate details of any measures taken to decriminalize irregular migration and any institutions responsible for ensuring that the children of such migrants had access to healthcare, education, birth registration and other services. Information on the procedure for registering the children of undocumented migrants and any complaint mechanisms available to such migrants would also be welcome.

Mr. Charef said that he would be grateful for information on the outcomes of any development support programmes implemented in the State Party. He would welcome information on the situation of Rastafarians in Jamaica and any policies or programmes to protect them against discrimination.

The meeting rose at 5.50 p.m.