British woman agrees to leave state

A British citizen who was previously ordered to be removed from the state has agreed that she will leave voluntarily on July 29, and it was agreed that this will be without an immigration or police escort.

One of Juanita Headley’s lawyers, Jomo Thomas, said that at his client’s court appearance on July 20, there was consent of the parties that Headley should leave the country on July 29, barring any flight cancellations.

Additionally, that the passport that was confiscated by the authorities would be returned by today, July 23. However, the counsel noted that the passport has already been returned.

Further, “Any reference which the respondent(the Immigration authorities) made on Facebook or any other such thing” where it concerns Headley, “would be removed.”

This marks a resolution to the long saga between Headley, and the Passports and Immigration Department which previously resulted in Headley being taken by the authorities before the Serious Offences Court(SOC) on June 17.

At the SOC an application was submitted by a Senior Immigration Officer for Headley’s removal pursuant to section 22 of the Immigration (Restriction) Act, as she had been deemed a prohibited immigrant within the meaning of section 4(1)(A) of the Act.

Headley, an author who also speaks as an anti-trafficking advocate and is a registered lawyer in the United States of America, claimed she was taken to the court without having a shower, or being allowed to go to the toilet, and that she was treated “like a criminal”. She also asked for lawyers to be present, and named Thomas and counsel Maia Eustace as her attorneys, although they weren’t representing her at the time. However, the court proceeded with granting the removal order in the absence of lawyers.

Headley also demanded to know why she was being denied permission to stay in the country, telling the magistrate, “I was told nine months is too long for a holiday, that doesn’t sound like a legal reason for me not to be given an extension when I’ve been doing human trafficking prevention work in your country for nine months.”

When the authorities were removing her from the court premises the young woman commented, “…It’s unreasonable. I’m gonna fight this in England. I’m a British citizen, I have rights. I have a lawyer, why isn’t my lawyer here?”

Thomas and Eustace began representing her shortly after, Thomas explaining that he felt disgusted by what he read in the media about the way she was treated.

He noted that he was working alongside Eustace, to ensure Headley’s due process rights were recognised and maintained.

“…And I think we have done that, we have gotten her to this point,” the counsel said yesterday.

The lawyers had filed an appeal to the removal order granted on June 17, but the Tuesday following this, on June 22, the authorities attempted to repatriate Headley. This was unsuccessful, Chief Immigration Officer(CIO) Beverly Walker posited that this failure was a result of Headley’s disruptive actions at the Argyle International Airport(AIA).

Nonetheless, the move by the authorities to deport her was not one that Thomas and Eustace appreciated.

When asked yesterday if there were any areas of concern that had arisen from this case, Thomas said “I just think that the authorities ought to respect its own statutory law. If somebody’s detained and a removal order is made against the person, the authority should first ascertain whether that person intends to invoke his or her right to appeal because the law allows for the right to appeal, and they would have seven days to do that.”

“I don’t see how the authorities could without a clear and distinct understanding from the undesirable person, that they have no intention to appeal – I don’t see how they could properly move to effectuate the appeal within the period when the person has a right to appeal” he stated.

The lawyers got a hearing before Justice Nicola Byer and an interim injunction was granted staying the deportation, pending the hearing on July 20. In the meantime Headley, who was being kept by the authorities, was then released into the care of counsel, who would ensure her appearance in court.

Although Headley has previously argued adamantly against leaving St Vincent and the Grenadines, she has been reported in the local media recently saying that she no longer desires to stay here.

When she leaves on July 29, this will be the end of a stay that began in August 2020. When she first arrived, Headley informed authorities that she was staying for 21 days, and she was on vacation.

As a British citizen, she was granted six months on entry, following which she applied for and received at least three extensions of stay until her last application in May 2021 was denied.

Headley told SEARCHLIGHT previously that she had been given until May 25 to leave the country following the denial of her extension of stay. After this it appeared that she submitted an application for residency. She was given two days as an extension to the time when she could stay, until May 27, but was told she had to leave on May 27 and if the application was granted she could return.

She did not leave, and after unsuccessful attempts to reach her, on June 4 the Immigration Department posted a notice on Facebook with the caption; “Ms Juanita Headley is asked to come in to the Head Office of the Passports and Immigration Department in Kingstown. The matter is urgent”.

The British citizen ultimately was taken to court after she resisted the attempts of the Immigration authorities.