Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

ismisecathy

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Again she doesn't certainly state anything other than it wasn't what she was expecting. Which also doesn't amount to her having a definite idea of what she did expect.

Anyway I think this argument has gone on long enough over one sentence in a newspaper!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Ah come on lads, let her stay. ITS CHRISTMAS!
While we're at it, sure wouldn't the lads in the 'joy love to head home for a month or two. Sure it's Christmas after all. The time when law apparently doesn't/shouldn't REALLY matter.


Just when I thought we couldn't do worse than FF. I really, really, really am going to end up emigrating.

Go n'eiri and bothar leat

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yes it is. Any example of FGM is the result of a violent cultural tradition
with the express purpose of male's controlling female sexuality. I.E MEN MAKE THE RULES

FGM results in the cutting or removal of the tissues around the vagina that give women pleasurable sexual feelings. This procedure is used for social and cultural control of women's sexuality. n its most extreme form, infibulation, where the girl's vagina is sewn shut, the procedure ensures virginity.

You see? It is to keep the woman chaste before marriage for THE MAN. The fact that females are used to do the dirty work only makes the tradition more reprehensible.

And why do families request it? Families fear that if their daughters are left uncircumcised, they may not be marriageable. (THE MAN WONT MARRY HER) As in most cultures, there is also the fear that the girl might bring shame to the family by being sexually active and becoming pregnant before marriage. They also do it for religious reasons.

This doesnt make me a feminist. The fact that FGM is a form of male violence against women is accepted by all respectable authorities on the issue including the UN.

I have already given an example from Cameroon where a popular pastor successfully convinced the local women who performed FGM and families against the practice.

The result? 2 girls were kidnapped by the local tribesmen and cut. They died of blood loss. When the pastor spoke out again against this he was beaten to death. (The men were forced to take care of it themselves this time).

The fact that you dont accept that the male dominated culture are ultimately responsible for this barbaric tradition may have more to do with the prejudices that lead you to believe that prostitutes are responsible for the sex industry, than any logical reasoning.

This would seem to contradict your assertion that there have only been three cases in the past four years.

It dont see how it does. Its not an assertion of mine anyway, its a fact (check my reference): Since the Fornah case in the UK (3 years ago) there has only been 3 applications for asylum and only one granted on the basis of FGM.

blackiebest

Really not spamming and I know it has been refrenced before but this is a great piece of writing. Also some of you will be happy to know that Pamela received confirmation today that she will not be deported before mid Jan. So Donegal, i think she is now able to plan the holiday/party;)

Dear Minister Ahern

I'm writing to you today, two days before the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with a certain amount of misgiving but also with enormous pride, because I know that it is more than likely that you will read this letter. I cherish the fact that I live in a liberal democracy, where our politicians are known to us, where we can call them by their first names without causing offence, where even their nicknames are badges of affection. I love the fact that my children are growing up in this country, a place which is a bigger version of their home - a warm, loving, funny, challenging place. I remember reading a short article by a friend of mine, Chinedu Onyejelem, in which he described how moved he was to see Bertie Ahern, still our Taoiseach at the time, walking up the steps of the church in Cabra, on his way into mass. I remember feeling great pride in my country that such a thing, our country's leader mixing with other people, was possible, and that we had organised ourselves in such a way that we could take this simple act for granted.

I was watching the News on RTE one day last week, and there was an item on Pamela Izevbekhai and her daughters, a civic reception for them in Sligo. And I thought how profoundly upsetting it would be to see these three people being deported from our country, and how ashamed I would feel if this happened. I'm no expert on law and won't pretend to be, but I can think of no moral reason why Ms Izevbekhai and her children should not be allowed to stay here. I wasn't looking at precedents or statistics; I was looking at two little girls in their Sunday dresses, kicking their heels against the legs of the chairs they sat on. I saw the innocence and beauty, and the glimpse of the future, that we all love to see in children. I am a very proud citizen of Ireland but I hate to think how I will feel if I have to witness these two children being hauled out of my country and sent to a place where they might be maimed.

I grew up in a house where the Proclamation of Independence was up on the wall, in the hall, and I don't know how many times I read it or parts of it. I remember once when I was a child counting the number of times the word 'children' appeared in the document. I counted four. I remember thinking that this was amazing, that a document that started with the scary, stirring phrase, 'In the name of God and the dead generations' could also include children, that a call to arms could also be a warm embrace. The Proclamations's call to arms can be consigned to history but, perhaps more than ever before, we need the warm embrace. We are moving into frightening, uncertain times, made more frightening, I think, by much of the commentary and political decisions. Our politicians, I'm afraid, have not, to date, been serving us well. I can well understand that they might feel as uncertain and as frightened about the future as many of us are being made to feel. But I can't think of any other time in my life when acts of generosity and reassurance are so vital. The decision to let Pamela Izevbekhai and her children stay would be such an act. I've never met Ms Izevbekhai and her children but they look like a warm, beautiful family and, at this point in our history, we need all the beauty we can get.

Yours sincerely
Roddy Doyle

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

But the courts in the UK did not think her case was creditable either! It was not until she took her case to the highest court in the land that she won.

You are criticising Izebbezai for wasting tax payers money by doing exactly the same thing. Your reason was that she had failed to substantiate her claim, just like Fornah had at this stage. Therefore you would have branded Fornah a bogus asylum seeker at this stage even though she would be later vindicated.

But the Fornah case wasn't settled until the end of 2006!

OK 3 cases in 2 years then. Not exactly a breakthrough for your emotive "floodgates" argument is it?

My point was that granting asylum to anyone who simply states that there is a possibility that her daughters will undergo FGM will indeed make Ireland a more targetable country. We already receive more asylum applications from Nigeria than from any other country in the world.

No. You said that if we grant asylum to Pamela Izebbeyai then millions of Nigerian women and children will flock to Ireland.

You used the ridiculous calculation of the birthrate of Nigerian women to backup your "projected" floodgate figure and to scaremonger.

T runner

blackiebest wrote: »

Really not spamming and I know it has been refrenced before but this is a great piece of writing. Also some of you will be happy to know that Pamela received confirmation today that she will not be deported before mid Jan. So Donegal, i think she is now able to plan the holiday/party;)

Dear Minister Ahern

I'm writing to you today, two days before the 60th anniversary of the signing of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, with a certain amount of misgiving but also with enormous pride, because I know that it is more than likely that you will read this letter. I cherish the fact that I live in a liberal democracy, where our politicians are known to us, where we can call them by their first names without causing offence, where even their nicknames are badges of affection. I love the fact that my children are growing up in this country, a place which is a bigger version of their home - a warm, loving, funny, challenging place. I remember reading a short article by a friend of mine, Chinedu Onyejelem, in which he described how moved he was to see Bertie Ahern, still our Taoiseach at the time, walking up the steps of the church in Cabra, on his way into mass. I remember feeling great pride in my country that such a thing, our country's leader mixing with other people, was possible, and that we had organised ourselves in such a way that we could take this simple act for granted.

I was watching the News on RTE one day last week, and there was an item on Pamela Izevbekhai and her daughters, a civic reception for them in Sligo. And I thought how profoundly upsetting it would be to see these three people being deported from our country, and how ashamed I would feel if this happened. I'm no expert on law and won't pretend to be, but I can think of no moral reason why Ms Izevbekhai and her children should not be allowed to stay here. I wasn't looking at precedents or statistics; I was looking at two little girls in their Sunday dresses, kicking their heels against the legs of the chairs they sat on. I saw the innocence and beauty, and the glimpse of the future, that we all love to see in children. I am a very proud citizen of Ireland but I hate to think how I will feel if I have to witness these two children being hauled out of my country and sent to a place where they might be maimed.

I grew up in a house where the Proclamation of Independence was up on the wall, in the hall, and I don't know how many times I read it or parts of it. I remember once when I was a child counting the number of times the word 'children' appeared in the document. I counted four. I remember thinking that this was amazing, that a document that started with the scary, stirring phrase, 'In the name of God and the dead generations' could also include children, that a call to arms could also be a warm embrace. The Proclamations's call to arms can be consigned to history but, perhaps more than ever before, we need the warm embrace. We are moving into frightening, uncertain times, made more frightening, I think, by much of the commentary and political decisions. Our politicians, I'm afraid, have not, to date, been serving us well. I can well understand that they might feel as uncertain and as frightened about the future as many of us are being made to feel. But I can't think of any other time in my life when acts of generosity and reassurance are so vital. The decision to let Pamela Izevbekhai and her children stay would be such an act. I've never met Ms Izevbekhai and her children but they look like a warm, beautiful family and, at this point in our history, we need all the beauty we can get.

Yours sincerely
Roddy Doyle

Thanks for that Blackiebest. Thats good news.
(That should clear up the misrepresentations of her quotes yesterday.)
Hope herself and the 2 girls have a good Christmas in Sligo.
She has fought brilliantly for their case. The girls are lucky to have such a strong Mother!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dodgyme

blackiebest wrote: »

Really not spamming and I know it has been refrenced before but this is a great piece of writing.

It is a great bit of writing alright but pure emotive drivel if you ask me.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, No. the first sentence from Blackiebest clears up misrepresentations of her quotes made on this site. E.g The reason she was saying she couldn't plan the party was in order to try and get free xmas presents.

some of you will be happy to know that Pamela received confirmation today that she will not be deported before mid Jan. So Donegal, i think she is now able to plan the holiday/party

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

Sorry, I think it's the result of a violent cultural tradition in which men and women are equally complicit. The vast majority of female circumcisions are performed by women.

But they are all carried out on women and the reason they are carried out is to ensure that a woman does not take pleasure from sex and thus is virginal for the man.

I would charge the people who carry it out for sure. But most of them believe they are helping the woman.

If the society wasn't male dominated the practice would not exist.

And you think women don't want to control other women's sexuality?

No I dont, to be honest. Why would they supress thier own sexuality? They couldny anyway because they dont have the power to do so in these male dominated cultures.

What about the example you gave yesterday, when it was being done on pregnant women? Who presumably were already married?

FGM is carried out on under 10 year olds in the vast amount of cases in Nigeria. It is getting younger all the time.

So you exonerate the women who are actually wielding the razor blades, then? It all has to do with male power?

No they should be charged, just like the soldier who pushes the jews into the gas chamber. The Hitlers in these cases (The male tribal leaders standing over this in the background) should also be charged but they wont.

I would guess that once proper measures are actually used to curb the practice things will get very ugly for a while. As some of the women start refusing to perform the mutilations then coersion, beatings, killings and forced FGM will increase and it more clearly wont be women behind it.

Again, you are getting carried away here. You are giving me all the reasons why some families in Nigeria choose to carry out this so-called cultural tradition. But the point about Pamela Izevbekhai is that she doesn't want to have her daughters circumcised. And that's a respectable choice to make, even in Nigeria, where 40 percent of girls and women are unaffected even in the regions where this "custom" is most strongly rooted.

You are talking about regions when you should be talking about cultural groups. Those 40% are not part of cultural groups that carry out the practice, so they are not choosing to say no. The Izenbezai girls are part of a cultural group with FGM and they argue that "no" is not an option for them.

Yes, well you'll often find that the "respectable authorities" take a very narrow and dogmatic view of things. I don't know how can both accept that FGM is carried out primarily by women on girls, and still say that it's "male violence" against women.

In the same way as you can say soldiers carried out gasing of Jews but the holocaust was caused by the Nazi's "Final Solution".

Women carry out the practice, men are behind it.

I think I said I wasnt a feminist in the last post. I looked it up, I think it means that someone who believes the sees should be treated equally so I guess I am one.

I didn't say that prostitutes are responsible for the sex industry. Men want to buy sex for money and women supply it. Both are culpable, and both have to accept responsibility for their actions. It's not as simple as blaming the man while exonerating the woman.

Women supply it??? What about the Pimps and Sex traffickers???
Are they not a level above the prostitutes and lap dancers. Do they not effectively supply it? and employ, exploit, abuse, enslave women to work for them?

Im sorry but men (scumbag ****) demand the sex industry and men (rapist, criminal, human trafficer, abusers) supply it.

By in large, weak, vulnerable women will be used by these scum.
And if they are short of them they can enslave women from other parts of the world and bring them for their esteemed male clients.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

blackiebest

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You see Donegal, you keep doing it. You undermine your obvious conviction with really low grade snipes. So what if the people of Sligo hold a birthday party, which I am not aware of, what does that say? What does it say that Pamela was a guest speaker in our Dail Eireann and Seanad? What does it say that the second largest political party have completely endorsed her plight? That the caliber of Roddy Doyle can create such a script for the benefit of a lady he has never met? Are we all 'sentimental drivelests'?

Or maybe we are Irish and maybe we want to treat Pamela as she would treat us, if she was in that position. You are wrong to hold your views and I hope that someday you will see that.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

blackiebest

Honestly today I spoke with a very close friend and main supporter of hers in order to clarify if she knew if she was definitely here through to new year, that is why I clarified the situation in my first 'today' post. In the course of the conversation I aske how she was and he told me exhausted and just back in Sligo and had the phone off, then said that all she wants to do is "climb into some hole and hide and have some quiet time". That is how much she is enjoying all of this, she would probably give anything to be able to have an anonymous Christmas with only close friends as you will probably have. You think you have the authority to decide that she is "enjoying her celebrity status" ? You have no idea how she is feeling or how it feels for her when you state that she could be enjoying any part of this debacle. You are right that she is trying to do the best for herself and her children, do you not do that for you and your family?

The people of Sligo will have a party allright, but not untill Pamela is granted leave to reside here and I hope that party will be sooner rather than later.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

FGM cuts off the female cliterous. It stops females having pleasure during sex.
This makes them theoretically less promiscuous than those without the procedure. It is that simple.

Customs and tradition are "far more cited" because they are more palatable than the truth (whether concious or subconcious) which is that the men dont want their women being promiscuous and cutting off their cliterous ensures this. Therfore, this violence against women is carried out for the benefit of men.

The fact that you cant see this is irrelevant because thats the way it is defined by experts around the world.

It may be the case that male Jealousy has a sociobiological function: Women do not want their mates to become attracted to younger, nubile women, because the sexual desirability of the younger female threatens the stability of the family unit.

Where to you get it from? I dont think you even believe that yourself!

Honestly, I don't think there are Hitler-like figures standing in the background orchestrating all of this. FGM is a long-standing tradition for many tribes. They just do it—for a variety of complex, interconnected cultural and social reasons—but there's no male conspiracy behind this. We don't need someone to tell us to celebrate Christmas, do we?

From your quote: "abolition... will destroy the tribal system." Now that is interesting! A former president of Kenya believed that it would destroy the tribal system. A powerful incentive for the (male) tribal leaders to ensure and enforce its continuance. Otherwise the tribe is gone.
This shows that the most powerful members of the ethnic groups believe that FGM is vital for the tribes survival.
So what happens if the females stop cooperating? Do the male leaders stand idly be and let theie way of life die? Oe do they Intervene?

That is not true. Pamela Izevbekhai comes from a tradition that does not practice FGM. Her husband Tony comes from a background that does, which is why the first daughter was circumcised, at the behest of his family.

The husbands family and ethnic group obviously believe the children are part of their group, which is where the danger lies.

You are getting carried away again. I wasn't talking about sex trafficking or sex slavery, and I made that very clear in an earlier post. My point is that the many women who have chosen to work in the sex industry cannot be described as innocent victims of male abuse.

Heres what you actually said:

"Men want to buy sex for money and women supply it. Both are culpable, and both have to accept responsibility for their actions."

Not quite the same thing is it?
You stated that women supply sex. But that ignores the fact that pimps, sex trafficers (nearly always male) run and supply the sex industry. The women are in actual fact the product.
Most of the money is paid by men and most of the profit is received by men.

Sure, some of the women may have a free choice, some will have a more limited choice, some will have little choice, and some will be slaves. Nearly all will be exploited to some degree by men.

Why is there no booming sex industry of females demanding men?

AlekSmart

The people of Sligo will have a party allright, but not untill Pamela is granted leave to reside here and I hope that party will be sooner rather than later.

If one thing can be taken from the obvious strength of the belief`s held by donegalfella vs those of T runner and blackiebest it that the words "Some of" need to be inserted at the beginning of the above quote.

Im also somewhat taken aback by the Fine Gael intervention as I would suggest that it could be taken as an attempt to pressurize the Judiciary in advance of what should be a decision making process dealing ONLY with the specific application at hand.

I hope BOTH sides of this thread would agree that introducing native Irish political party scrapping into this will only ensure that rationality goes up the chimney immediately after Santy...:(

blackiebest

AlekSmart wrote: »

If one thing can be taken from the obvious strength of the belief`s held by donegalfella vs those of T runner and blackiebest it that the words "Some of" need to be inserted at the beginning of the above quote.

Im also somewhat taken aback by the Fine Gael intervention as I would suggest that it could be taken as an attempt to pressurize the Judiciary in advance of what should be a decision making process dealing ONLY with the specific application at hand.

I hope BOTH sides of this thread would agree that introducing native Irish political party scrapping into this will only ensure that rationality goes up the chimney immediately after Santy...:(

Spot on, agree with every point

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

HollyB

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I agree with that.

The Izevbekhais have had the chance to make a legal case for asylum. So far, they have been unable to do so. If they are able to make a legal case for asylum or for subsidiary protection at a future court appearance, then I certainly wouldn't have any problem with that and I would hope that's true of most people in Ireland. However, if they are found to be ineligible for asylum or subsidiary protection, then I would be opposed to the idea of an exception being made because of the attention the case has attracted.

It is a matter for a court of law, not the court of public opinion.

One person is not more deserving of the right to remain than another simply because they have been able to attract more attention from the media and to muster up a crowd of supporters to wave placards and call for an exception to be made for them. If somebody is popular and well-respected in the local community, it speaks well of their character but it does not make the grounds on which they are seeking asylum more or less legitimate. It's not about who is most popular or who can point to the most supporters.

Granting somebody who had not succeeded in proving their need for asylum leave to remain in the country because they're well-liked is as unjust as refusing asylum to somebody who genuinely merits it because they're disliked - if not more so, given that the life of the unpopular person could be placed in jeopardy because they are unable to muster up the same level of support as the popular person.

Look at the case of Kunle Eluhanla; when he was deported, he was one of 35 or so Nigerians deported on the same flight. He was allowed back into the country (where he has remained, despite the fact that the visa he was given only allowed him to stay for six months) as a direct result of the protests made by his classmates. Does that mean that he deserved to be allowed to remain in Ireland more than the other 30-odd people deported to Nigeria with him, who didn't have the same kind of protests organized on their behalf?

No, it means that he happened to have been lucky enough to have the support of his classmates. It did not alter the circumstances of his claim to asylum and I think that it was a mistake for Minister McDowell to bow to pressure as he did.

If the Izevbekhai case does not succeed in the court of law, then I do not want to see the court of public opinion being allowed to overturn the verdict.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

HollyB

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I don't know if she'd actually be granted refugee status but if appeals to the court of public opinion can obtain her leave to remain, it's the same general direction. Asylum cases should be decided by the bodies set up to make those decisions and, if needs be, decisions can be appealed in a court of law. The court of public opinion should play no part in the decision making.

I'm sure that nobody would think that if somebody is found to merit asylum, they should be deported if a few hundred people can be mustered to protest that they don't want them to be allowed to stay in the country because they're rude and anti-social.

It's not a popularity contest, it's not about who has the cutest kids with the most Irish accents, it's not about who is able to "contribute" to the community or to the Irish economy and it's certainly not about who can garner the most publicity. Asylum is about protection for people fleeing persecution. A lot of crappy things happen in the world but not all of them are grounds for asylum. If they qualify for protection under the guidelines for determining who is entitled to asylum, they stay. If not, they go.

balanced view

I think its time people stood back a bit and examine all the facts of the Pamela Izevbekhai application for asylum and how the different decision-makers have come to different conclsusions, based on the same information.
Three High Court judges found that she had a compelling case and awarded her judicial reviews. Two different Judges, who heard the reviews, felt that they could not "look behind" the original decision-makers ruling and could not or would not look at new evidence submitted, on the basis that the original decision makers didn't have this evidence in front of them.
The case has gone around and around in circles in our Court system, so much so that the Public started to have concerns about how two young infants and their mother were being bandied about and kicked to touch by all concerned. Nobody seems to be actually looking at the real issue here - i.e child safety.
Public Opinion seems to feel that it is clearly not safe to deport these people back to an uncertain future where the children's safety is not guaranteed. We, in ireland, have several well defined child safety programmes( eg Stay Safe Programme, Dept of Ed and Children First, HSE).
They clearly state thet the "best interests of children is paramount".
This belief seems to have been ignored by the decision-makers in this case. Hence, Public Opinion has shown its concerns by contacting politicians on all sides and politicons from all sides have joined to express their concerns about this case.
If the Court system is unwilling or unable to recognise this, then it is time we looked at a new way of assessing these cases in an open and impartial forum.
In my opinion the Courts and the Minister have repeatedly kicked to touch in this case, hoping that it will just go away, rather than face up to their international legal duties and responsibilities for fear of setting some precedent.
Furthermore, at least two similar type applications have been granted asylum here so this would not create a precedent but, they might not have been from Nigeria?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

dodgyme

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

From Todays indo:

FOUR out of five asylum seekers have been caught making false claims by 'language detectives' who can tell where they really come from, the Irish Independent has learned.

I was really shocked when I saw that :eek: not:rolleyes:

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/four-in-every-five-asylum-seekers-caught-out-by-language-police-1582891.html