National Security Advisor Gerry Gouveia has weighed in on the controversy surrounding the screening of a United States citizen with a prosthetic leg at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA), saying that while all passengers must be subjected to security checks, screening procedures should be conducted with professionalism, dignity and sensitivity.
In a statement on his Facebook page without naming the passenger, Gouveia said airport security officers have a responsibility to ensure that every passenger and item entering a secure area has been properly screened, regardless of a person’s status, nationality, age or disability.
“Every passenger, regardless of status, nationality, age, or disability, deserves to be treated with dignity, respect, and professionalism,” Gouveia, a pilot, said.
He noted that aviation authorities worldwide have encountered attempts to conceal prohibited items, including drugs, weapons and explosives, in clothing, luggage, mobility aids and prosthetic devices, making security screening a necessary component of air travel.
“The question therefore should not be whether a passenger with a prosthetic limb should be screened. The answer is yes—just as every passenger must be screened,” he said.
According to Gouveia, who operates a domestic airline, the central issue is whether the screening was carried out professionally and in accordance with established procedures.
“The more important question is whether the screening was conducted professionally, respectfully, sensitively, and in accordance with approved procedures,” he stated.
His comments come days after United States citizen Zaid Khan publicly complained about his treatment by airport security personnel while departing Guyana on June 17.
However, aviation specialist and owner of Secure Innovations and Concepts Inc which provides aviation security at the Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Timehri and Eugene F Correia International Airport among others, said CJIA should be applauded.
Hopkinson, who has been in aviation since 1972, said on his Facebook page that no one is above the rules.
“No one is above the rules and regulations of air travel. When passing through any airport, thank the hard-working security that keep you safe. That is their job to verify all anomalies. Don’t become complacent, 9/11 might be forgotten by some. We need to do our jobs without fear or favor,” he said.
Khan, who uses a prosthetic leg, told Kiskadee Watch that he felt “scared” and “humiliated” after being asked to remove both his trousers and prosthetic limb during a security screening process. He said he attempted to explain that the request was not part of standard screening procedures for amputees.
However, CJIA Chairman Sanjeev Datadin has denied that airport personnel acted improperly.
Datadin told Kiskadee Watch that Khan did not initially indicate that he had a prosthetic limb before entering the scanner and said security officers were following standard operating procedures.
According to Datadin, Khan was offered two screening options: removal of the prosthetic limb for scanning, which would have been the quicker process, or a more extensive screening procedure involving additional checks, including physical examination and chemical swabbing. He said Khan ultimately chose the latter option and was not instructed to remove the prosthetic limb.
Khan has disputed that account, maintaining that airport personnel lacked proper training in dealing with passengers with disabilities and that he was required to explain the appropriate procedures himself.
In a subsequent statement, the Cheddi Jagan International Airport Corporation (CJIA) said it remains committed to maintaining the highest standards of aviation security while ensuring that all passengers, including persons with disabilities, are treated with courtesy and professionalism.
The corporation said that under the National Civil Aviation Security Programme, additional screening is mandatory whenever an alert is generated or an anomaly is detected during the initial screening process.
According to CJIA, passengers are offered two options when further screening is required. They may either undergo screening in a private room or remain at the main checkpoint and be subjected to secondary screening using specialised equipment.
The airport corporation stressed that the removal of a prosthetic device is not mandatory at any stage of the screening process.
“At no time is the removal of a prosthetic device mandatory,” the statement said.
CJIA also encouraged passengers to report concerns directly to airport management and said all complaints would be investigated to determine whether established procedures were followed.
The incident has generated discussion on social media about airport security practices and the treatment of persons with disabilities.
Without directly commenting on the specifics of Khan’s case, Gouveia said any shortcomings in disability awareness, communication or staff training should be addressed.
“If there are lessons to be learned regarding disability awareness, communication, or staff training, then those lessons should be embraced. Continuous improvement is a hallmark of every strong aviation system,” he said.
He added that safety and dignity should not be viewed as competing priorities.
“In aviation, safety and dignity are not competing values. We must always strive to achieve both,” he said.
Khan continues to stand by his position and posted the following statement on the Kiskadee Watch Facebook page.
“I respectfully disagree with several aspects of Chairman Sanjeev Datadin’s statement.
My concern has never been about legitimate airport security measures. I fully support security screening and the safety of all passengers.
“My concern is that, in my experience, the screening personnel appeared unfamiliar with internationally recognized screening practices for amputees and travelers with prosthetic devices.
“Based on my extensive travel experience, including frequent travel through airports in the United States, a visibly worn prosthetic limb does not generally require documentation to establish that a passenger is an amputee. In fact, notification cards or medical documentation are typically voluntary tools intended for travelers who prefer not to publicly disclose or expose their disability.
“In my case, I openly disclosed that I was a below-knee amputee and physically showed security personnel that I was wearing a prosthetic leg before entering the scanner. I believe CCTV footage will confirm this.
“The fact that public statements continue to focus heavily on the absence of documentation raises important questions regarding disability-awareness training and whether airport personnel are sufficiently familiar with internationally accepted screening procedures for amputees.
“I am actually grateful that these statements have been made publicly because they highlight what I believe to be a need for enhanced training, clearer protocols, and greater awareness regarding the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities.
“This matter has never been about avoiding screening. I fully cooperated with security personnel.
“This matter is about ensuring that all travelers—including amputees, senior citizens, disabled veterans, and persons living with disabilities—are treated with dignity, respect, and in accordance with established procedures.
“I continue to welcome an independent, evidence-based investigation and remain confident that the CCTV footage, witness statements, and other records will accurately reflect what occurred”.
Discussion