Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

balanced view

[The welfare of children is paramount] -The whole refugee system is geared to provide protection to those and only those who are deserving and fulfill certain criteria. It is not about entering a country legally or illegally. This doesn't matter in refugee cases and anyone fleeing persecution does not alway have the time or facilities to do everything legally.
The whole point of this case is providing safety and protection to 2 little infant girls and their mother.
I think anyone who is actually fully aware of all the facts and risks facing the 3 applicants would have no hestitation in providing those protections[/quote]

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

marcsignal

balanced view wrote: »

[The welfare of children is paramount] -The whole refugee system is geared to provide protection to those and only those who are deserving and fulfill certain criteria. ............

............. I think anyone who is actually fully aware of all the facts and risks facing the 3 applicants would have no hestitation in providing those protections

Hmmmmm, yeah, forgive me, but I can't help thinking I've heard similar facts cited in other deportation cases in times past....

balanced view

marcsignal wrote: »

Hmmmmm, yeah, forgive me, but I can't help thinking I've heard similar facts cited in other deportation cases in times past....

Hmmmmm, yeah, what facts ?????
I haven't heard of any other case like this anywhere in Ireland. Let not the cruel death of an 18 month old baby girl be in vain. Let it be a harsh reminder to us all that we all have a responsibility to protect all children from harm especially those who are living here and now in Ireland.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

djpbarry

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Have you ever been an unsuccessful applicant for something? If so, does that make you an opportunist, perjurer, fabulist or fabricator?

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But that does not make asylum seekers equivalent to immigrants.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's not what I said. I said that I have been arguing throughout this thread (largely in response to assertions that Ms. Izevbekhai is a liar, fraud, etc.) that the court has accepted her version of events. What was up for decision was whether she had grounds for asylum, not whether she was telling the truth. Your post has just confirmed this, even though you previously disputed it.

balanced view

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Try explaining that logic to the Mother of a dead 18 month -old baby.

Ah yea, sure, her other 2 infants have nothing to worry about.
Forget about your dead sister that you never met. Sure ye might be meeting her shortly (in the grave) if I bring ye back to your grandparents !
Maybe she should've dug the poor mite's skeleton from her grave and packed in her suitcase to show our Court. Maybe she didn't have the time. After all she was fleeing a very well founded fear of further persecution of her other two infant girls.

marcsignal

balanced view wrote: »

Hmmmmm, yeah, what facts ?????

my point exactly, you've just said it better than i ever could

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

balanced view

marcsignal wrote: »

Hmmmmm, yeah, forgive me, but I can't help thinking I've heard similar facts cited in other deportation cases in times past....

I know one certain fact about you but I wouldn't be let post it here

marcsignal

balanced view wrote: »

I know one certain fact about you but I wouldn't be let post it here

:rolleyes:

you know 2 things about me exactly, nothing and sweet FA

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

balanced view

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The National Police turn a blind eye to it, just like our Justice System has!

It seems 0ur Courts and Justice Dept are happy to send 2 little infant girls and their Mother back to face severe and irreversible harm like lambs to the slaughter!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Húrin

Pete4779 wrote: »

Yup. I absolutely think she and anyone she is responsible for should be deported. The far-left appeasment is what is causing this endless appeal system, and she should not be here in the first place.

It's you and me that will end up paying - and I would rather pay (my taxes) to help some local kid get free schooling than pay for endless legal costs and social welfare support for people who are here purely to leech our system.

This is just hate and greed talking - that comes from the devil. It is not the far left causing these endless appeals, it is lack of clear government policy. FGM victims are not here to leech, but to enjoy human rights. Most of them would work if they were allowed to.

The merciful policy would be to permit Pamela and others like her to stay. I think that those who would send her to live in conditions that they themselves would never tolerate for themselves, must be suppressing their own consciences.

mikemac

Very long thread, loads of examples

To keep it simple:
She should have stayed in the first "safe" country she arrived in.
I'm not rereading this entire thread to figure out if that's the UK or Sweden or The Netherlands.
But it wasn't Ireland and it's shouldn't be the Irish taxpayer paying these countless legal bills.

Sure the asulym process in Ireland is a mess and I'd love to see a system that gave instant or very quick decisions with due process.
But even with the worlds greatest and fairest system, I'm sure for every denied application there'd still be an appeal and another appeal and then an injunction in the High Court and then an appeal to the ECHR.
Where does it end and why are taxpayers paying for the lawyers for all these? So Pamela Izevbekhai, do you have no money to pay your own bills even if you are not allowed work?

seanybiker

if she was so worries she should at least entered ireland legally at least then she would have a chance. Send her home and be done with it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

mikemac

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Thanks for the info. Sounds well dodgy. And I was thinking she was so terrified so took the first flight out of Nigeria and that happened to be to a direct flight to Ireland, oh wait...................

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't doubt it.
The true asylum seekers flee Nigeria for neighboring countries, probably Cameroon. I doubt many would have any knowledge of a small, wind swept country on the edge of Europe.
Without a doubt, many/most of the asylum seekers in Ireland are middle class or professionals and probably had a decent living in Nigeria. I know some pedantic poster will post GDP figures at me but they aren't exactly fleeing a war-zone with nothing and having lost everything!
Backup for this? It's posted further back in this thread.

marcsignal

Húrin wrote: »

This is just hate and greed talking - that comes from the devil.

*shakes head* Húrin Please.......

Húrin wrote: »

It is not the far left causing these endless appeals, it is lack of clear government policy.

might also be, that the lack of government policy, is possibly being exploited by the far left tho

Húrin wrote: »

FGM victims are not here to leech, but to enjoy human rights. Most of them would work if they were allowed to.

The Dutch have a poor human rights record ????

Húrin wrote: »

The merciful policy would be to permit Pamela and others like her to stay.

merciful, very possibly, but tbh there's also got to be room in there for wisdom and feasability

Húrin wrote: »

I think that those who would send her to live in conditions that they themselves would never tolerate for themselves, must be suppressing their own consciences.

well, that's not my decision to make, but i realise the world is not a nice place sometimes, if there was something i could do to make it nice for everyone all the time, i'd do it, who wouldn't ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

marcsignal

If i recall, unless i'm very much mistaken, a few years ago, one of the facts going around at the time of Kunlee Elunhanla's first deportation, was that his life was in certain danger in Nigeria. I have to say, he looked remarkably well for a persecuted man, when he came back to do his leaving cert.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Manic Moran

An immediate thought is that Nigeria is awash with guns. She or some man in her life could make it quite an expensive proposition to try to grab the girls for a little mutilation.

All of you who have posted here could have a very different opinion if you knew her and knew her circumstances

With respect, I think you'll find that most refugees, asylum seekers, and legal immigrants tend to be pretty nice people. It is probably to our benefit that we don't know the woman personally, else we run the risk of emotions clouding our better judgement. It wouldn't be the first time such an effect has happened, and I'm sure it wouldn't be the last either.

If we are to presume that FGM is a problem which needs to be dealt with (cue our imposing our culture on others, but anyway), then there seem to be two viable alternatives. One is to accept everyone who fears FGM, the other is to eliminate FGM at the source. The former is simply a bad idea, for two reasons. Firstly, it excessively strains the resources of the receiving countries, and secondly, it does nothing to rectify the source of the problem to begin with.

Dealing with the source problem is obviously better. So how is that done? Well, one possibility is that we can ensure that hospitals and such in Nigeria are sufficiently well-equipped and doctors sufficiently well trained to carry out the procedures without the ill-effects of infections and so on. It allows the Nigerian cultures to carry on their traditions, and without the nasty side-effects.

We could always take the direct approach, invade, and shoot everyone who conducts an FGM, but that could be argued to be a little extreme. Or we could just arm the anti-FGM types and they can sort it out between themselves in a nice little civil war. Probably also a little extreme, but most countries go through such an upheaval from time to time.

More reasonably, they can undertake a program of education. I believe this is currently being done, with varying amounts of success. There are certainly some communities in Nigeria where FGM is not appreciated. Even if they're not province-sized areas, just towns. It probably does a lot more good for their cause to divert anti-FGM people to those locations where they can add towards a critical mass as opposed to simply siphoning them off to Europe or wherever. The more of these people are in Nigeria, the greater the pressure on the government to actively reign in FGM. The Nigerian government probably doesn't really give much of a damn about the opinions of those living in Letterkenny or wherever. If it were a repressive government looking to repress those who didn't side with FGM that would be one thing, but it's not. Supposedly the Nigerian government is on their side, it should be made to uphold that. Both by external, and more importantly, internal pressure. Letting people vanish out of the country is not going to help the latter.

So what does granting asylum on the grounds of fear of potential FGM actually achieve for Nigeria? If it's a Nigerian problem, perhaps the Nigerians ought to try to sort it out? They might have more of an incentive to do so if the easy option of just getting out of the country were not available.

NTM

djpbarry

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Which surely depends on what has happened in the past, does it not?

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Eh, no. It means that she was unable to prove beyond doubt that her daughters would be subjected to FGM.

I'd be interested in seeing where you got that court statement from, by the way.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How much of that goes to the applicants themselves? It’s not the fault of the applicants that our asylum system is appallingly inefficient.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

:rolleyes: Would you have been more receptive had she fled in 1994? I don’t think so.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'd be surprised if we received many asylum applications from any country prior to 1992.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

How many of them were asylum seekers?

asdasd

It’s not the fault of the applicants that our asylum system is appallingly inefficient.

I think we are all in favour of efficiency. And yet, she stays.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.