Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

blackiebest

therewillbe wrote: »

Yes, out they go , about bloody time as well.

Brilliant and insightful contribution, thank you

ParkRunner

T runner wrote: »

The minister does not have to give reasons for his decision to deport to the applicant other than the general reason that it is in accordance with the relevant Act and doesn't break any other Laws.
Which submission are you referring to?

The information submitted to the Minister needs to be carefully considered under the following headings:

Section 3(6) Immigration Act 1999

(6) In determining whether to make a deportation order in relation to a person, the Minister shall have regard to—

(a) the age of the person;

(b) the duration of residence in the State of the person;

(c) the family and domestic circumstances of the person;

(d) the nature of the person's connection with the State, if any;

(e) the employment (including self-employment) record of the person;

(f) the employment (including self-employment) prospects of the person;

(g) the character and conduct of the person both within and (where relevant and ascertainable) outside the State (including any criminal convictions);

(h) humanitarian considerations;

(i) any representations duly made by or on behalf of the person;

(j) the common good; and

(k) considerations of national security and public policy,
so far as they appear or are known to the Minister.

Section 5 Refugee Act 1996

5.—(1) A person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where, in the opinion of the Minister, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), a person's freedom shall be regarded as being threatened if, inter alia, in the opinion of the Minister, the person is likely to be subject to a serious assault (including a serious assault of a sexual nature).

As well as the relevant Articles under the European Convention on Human Rights. If after considering all the information submitted in detail under the above headings (and I haven't even touched on Subsidiary Protection) and the decision is said to lack transparecny then I don't know what more the Minister can do. If the decision was not transparent and carefully considered it would have been quashed a long time ago.

seancoistine

This case and many other like it are a racket by lawyers, facilitated by their collegues on the bench. The patience of the public is running out of fuse.

T runner

EF wrote: »

The information submitted to the Minister needs to be carefully considered under the following headings:

Section 3(6) Immigration Act 1999

(6) In determining whether to make a deportation order in relation to a person, the Minister shall have regard to—

(a) the age of the person;

(b) the duration of residence in the State of the person;

(c) the family and domestic circumstances of the person;

(d) the nature of the person's connection with the State, if any;

(e) the employment (including self-employment) record of the person;

(f) the employment (including self-employment) prospects of the person;

(g) the character and conduct of the person both within and (where relevant and ascertainable) outside the State (including any criminal convictions);

(h) humanitarian considerations;

(i) any representations duly made by or on behalf of the person;

(j) the common good; and

(k) considerations of national security and public policy,
so far as they appear or are known to the Minister.

Section 5 Refugee Act 1996

5.—(1) A person shall not be expelled from the State or returned in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where, in the opinion of the Minister, the life or freedom of that person would be threatened on account of his or her race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion.

(2) Without prejudice to the generality of subsection (1), a person's freedom shall be regarded as being threatened if, inter alia, in the opinion of the Minister, the person is likely to be subject to a serious assault (including a serious assault of a sexual nature).

As well as the relevant Articles under the European Convention on Human Rights. If after considering all the information submitted in detail under the above headings (and I haven't even touched on Subsidiary Protection) and the decision is said to lack transparecny then I don't know what more the Minister can do. If the decision was not transparent and carefully considered it would have been quashed a long time ago.

Sorry EF but that is information submitted to the Minister to help him with his decision. We are talking about the transparency of the Ministers decision to deport someone. What information does the Minister have to give to the applicant besides the direction of his decision?
He is not obliged to give any

ParkRunner

T runner wrote: »

Sorry EF but that is information submitted to the Minister to help him with his decision. We are talking about the transparency of the Ministers decision to deport someone. What information does the Minister have to give to the applicant besides the direction of his decision?
He is not obliged to give any

Information submitted by the applicant and her legal representative to support and make her case is the information which is carefully considered. Having given the sources of country of origin information relied upon and considered all the information submitted under the required legislation what do you expect the minister to do? Give a policy reason for every decision to deport an applicant?

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

I presume you're referring to this question:

My response is simple: In the majority of asylum cases that come before the Irish courts, an element of the applicant's case is the claim that the authorities in his or home country cannot provide reliable protection against whatever form of persecution he or she claims to be fleeing. The State's defence, in turn, is often to claim that state protections in the applicant's home country are adequate.

Yes, I agree with this.

Your methodology on this thread has been to dig up material that casts doubt on the adequacy or reliability of policing services in other countries, and to use that material to vindicate asylum applicants' claims that "state protections are inadequate." The problem is that one can invoke this exact line of argument in virtually every asylum case that comes before the Irish courts.

Sorry but that is COMPLETELY FALSE. I have shown with evidence from Country of Origin Reports (which are admissable as evidence in Court) that State PROTECTIONS in Nigeria are not practiced on the ground. I have shown that the state Laws against FGM there are not enforced AT ALL.

The reference to the police was in answer to your claim that adequate state protections were not important in the Izevbeyai case: only the ability of the police to protect a child from forcible kidnap. I again showed with country of origin evidence that the police force in Nigeria could not protect a child from this fate.

I pointed out that the RAT evidence only requires that Laws against FGM exist for state protections to be deemed adequate. I dont think having state protections in Law is the same as having state protections on the ground. You seem to think otherwise.

I think Ive explained my position often enough, yet your posts seem to continually strive to misrepresent it.

You want a case where I agree with a denial verdict?

Probably any case where either of the the two points I mentioned did not cause the asylum seeker to lose the case.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

FreedomJoe

Im starting to wonder how we are actually viewed as a nation by Asylum seekers.

A Co Mayo court has heard that gardaí are still not satisfied that they have properly identified a woman who claims to have been the victim of human trafficking.

The 22-year-old woman, who says she was forced to work in the sex industry in Ireland, told the court today she would try to help gardaí to locate a house in Castlebar in which she was held against her will.

Gardaí say have not been able to establish the woman's identity and they are not satisfied that she was the subject of human trafficking.

The woman, originally from Nigeria, initially told gardaí her name was Edith Jonho, but now she says her real name is Edith Orumwenes.

He said she had provided false documents and gardaí were not convinced she had been trafficked.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0113/orumwenese.html

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It means not enforced by the "State" and all its tools. You claimed I only proved the case for the police which is a misrepresentation of my position.

If I recall correctly, your response was to claim that the Nigerian police are rapists.

You recall incorrectly. Firstly, this was in response to your claim that state protections were not important in this case rather the ability of the police to stop the kidnap of a young girl.

Please check post 1005 on the Nigerian Polices inability to protect young girls in the case of forced kidnap for the purpose of FGM.

(deliberately misrepresented yet again, wheres the honour?)

The fact that Nigerian Police "rape and murder with impunity" (taken from Country of Origin report) is relevant, particularly to that forces attitide to females, but not the most damning indictment of that particular police forces ability to protect a young girl from kidnap.

No, T runner—our courts seem to think otherwise.

But I asked if you agree. (Your allowed have a position at odds with the court.)

Yes, please. And this is probably the fourth or fifth time I've asked you for an example.

And as many times you are unable to give me a concrete reason why I should.

But can you provide an example of a concrete, real case to come before the courts where you agree that the courts' denial of asylum was the proper and correct verdict?

"Probably any case where either of the the two points I mentioned did not cause the asylum seeker to lose the case."
Ill tell you what, if you really, really want a concrete example,? You go through all the cases based on this criteria and
Ill pick a concrete one for ya! No problem! Your idea, dont be lazy now!

T runner

EF wrote: »

Information submitted by the applicant and her legal representative to support and make her case is the information which is carefully considered. Having given the sources of country of origin information relied upon and considered all the information submitted under the required legislation what do you expect the minister to do? Give a policy reason for every decision to deport an applicant?

(EF, the Tribunal is also required to transmit a copy of the Notice of Appeal to the Minister, the Commissioner and UNHCR. If this process did not take place, the applicant could apply for judicial review for an order of certiorari removing, for the purposes of being quashed, the decision of the Tribunal.)

The minister should have to give reasons for any deportation order to show that all information was properly "considered".

AlekSmart

Im starting to wonder how we are actually viewed as a nation by Asylum seekers.

I think most "Ordinary" natives have for some time now been pondering aloud,albeit in small indiginous groups for fear of being labeled racist,about the issue of who is going to pay the escalating costs of the processess necessary to prove Èire`s bone fides as a first world caring democracy.

I may be remiss here but I`m somewhat concerned at how in the Izevbekhai case the lady has been afforded a considerable amount to leeway in the consideration of her case.

It is one thing to achieve a certain celebrity status within a social or political grouping but the facts remain as yet unaltered and they are of a person who has been treated with the utmost respect in the progression of her case.

There are I suspect,many Irish citizens who can point to being denied access to the full panopoly of the Law simply because they could not afford it.

That is not to deny Ms Izevbekhai her day in court but there has to be a point beyond which ANY system cannot bend,even if it may offend Liberal sensitivites.

The case as outlined by Freedomjoe is sadly becoming representative of many such "Asylum" cases where the most basic questions of Identity are allowed to be fudged,which almost guarantees grounds for subsequent appeals,reviews and plea`s.

It is becoming a war of attrition now,with a rather disturbing reality that the resources available to the "Asylum" Industry may well soon exceed those being allocated to the Garda National Immigration Bureau and the Courts Service combined.

The fact that Èire teo is effectively broke may well attract even more organized criminally inclined outfits,not ALL of whom are trafficking people, to come and try their luck at spinning our Lotto Wheel...sure,you can`t lose...can you ?

Who`s paying..?
Who Care`s.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

AlekSmart wrote: »

I think most "Ordinary" natives have for some time now been pondering aloud,albeit in small indiginous groups for fear of being labeled racist,about the issue of who is going to pay the escalating costs of the processess necessary to prove Èire`s bone fides as a first world caring democracy.

Contrary to popular belief and myth, Ireland does not have one of the higher per capita percentages of immigrants or asylum seekers.

I suppose you havent as an "ordinary native" evaluated the wastage in the design of the current asylum or evaluated the proposed new Bill to see how much wast is being addressed.

Why would you be called a racist? Presumably your not blaming foreigners for the design of our asylum system?

I may be remiss here but I`m somewhat concerned at how in the Izevbekhai case the lady has been afforded a considerable amount to leeway in the consideration of her case.

Im not aware that she has been afforded anything she wasn't legally entitled to, are you?

There are I suspect,many Irish citizens who can point to being denied access to the full panopoly of the Law simply because they could not afford it.

Whatever asylum seekers get they are entitled to under the Geneva convention.

That is not to deny Ms Izevbekhai her day in court but there has to be a point beyond which ANY system cannot bend,even if it may offend Liberal sensitivites.

Sounds nice, but how exactly has the system bent in this case?

The case as outlined by Freedomjoe is sadly becoming representative of many such "Asylum" cases where the most basic questions of Identity are allowed to be fudged,which almost guarantees grounds for subsequent appeals,reviews and plea`s.

Can you substantiate any of that or is it all conjecture on your part?

It is becoming a war of attrition now,with a rather disturbing reality that the resources available to the "Asylum" Industry may well soon exceed those being allocated to the Garda National Immigration Bureau and the Courts Service combined.

That dramatisation is your own. The cost in the asylum process our due to ineffiencies in it and not due to any "asylum" industry.

The fact that Èire teo is effectively broke may well attract even more organized criminally inclined outfits,not ALL of whom are trafficking people, to come and try their luck at spinning our Lotto Wheel...sure,you can`t lose...can you ?

Might it? I very much doubt it

Who`s paying..?
Who Care`s.

You dont seem to anyway. Do you even know whos paying? Tell me who pays for the Legal representation of asylum seekers in the Refugee Commision?

Theres been a lot of debate on this, but leave the old "were paying for these bogus chancers who are bleeding the country dry" argument where it belongs. In the rubbish tip.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

You proved yourself quite adept at locating and quoting from legal cases when doing so seemed to support your position. But when I ask you to find just one case where you agree that the courts did the correct and proper thing in denying asylum, you repeatedly evade the request. Why?

But you are the one evading! Ive told you why I considered 2-3 cases to be flawed. There are many I dont consider flawed, Im just not on principle prepared to look up cases based on your nonsensicle assertions.
Ive said it beofre if you are making a point it is up to you to prove it.

If you list any number of asylum cases I will pick a couple I agree with.
I will pick a case for you, but you do some work and list some, please.

Among all the many thousands of cases each year in which asylum is denied, you can't find one case in which you agree that the courts did the proper thing?

Can you prove that? List a few cases and Ill tell you if I agree with them or not. Dont be lazy

Your whole argument is falling apart here like a house of cards, T runner.

Even If you say it often enough it still wont come through! Your best bet is to tackle me on the points I am actually making. e.g State protections in Nigeria are inadequate, flaws in the Irish asylum system etc.
The facts are you know state protections are inadequate, you know the Nigerian police arent up to protecting against protecting young girls from kidnap for FGM. You have as good as conceded these points.

You are reduced to ridiculous claims that I object to every denial decision of an Irish court. Well prove your claims or drop them!! List some cases and see if I disagree with the results.
(And maybe try and refute the arguments I have made against the case in question, while youre at it.)

Sorry, but I don't see the misrepresentation here.

This was my response about policing in NIgeria. You misrepresented me by cherrypicking the Rape argument and claiming it represented my argument against Nigerian Policing. Apologies to other posters who may have read this already and for this lenghty post:

We are examining whether there are "adequate" protections against the specific threat of kidnapping with the objection of forced FGM, in Nigeria.
1. What choices does the person have when contacting the authorities?
2. What would the response of the state/police be?
3. Does the response constitute adequate state protection?

3. To answer the third question first. The Cyprian case in the UK defines adequate state protection as "a practical standard which takes proper account of the duty which the State owes to all its own nationals”. This means thats something like a gang overpowering a childs guardians and leaving before the police had time to arrive would not necessarily constitute inadequate protections, which is reasonable I think.

1. The legislation against FGM in Nigeria does not provide for safety, protection and barring orders. As the option of ringing the police and quoting one of these orders is not there,the only option available, as you suggest, would be to ring the police and claim there is an attempted kidnapping taking place on the particular female with the objective of a forced FGM.
For example, in domestic violence cases in Ireland, a person could get a protection order against someone and ring the Guards in expectance of an immediate response should that person turn up.

2. I believe that there is evidence that the police would not respond on different levels.

a. Firstly because of general ineffectiveness and corruption.
b. Complete lack of confidence by the citizenry in the force as a result of its impotency.
c. Cultural attitude in Nigeria means that police are less interested in violence against women.
d. Police attitudes and state protections towards FGM are not adequate.
e. Stats bear out that 1% of kidnappings make it to police records. This is not consistant with a liklihood of the police responding to a reasonable number of callouts.

(Note: Where country of origin information indicates that human rights and basic freedoms are provided for in the legislation or Constitution of the country or origin, the Tribunal does not query whether these rights are protected in practice.

The RAT believes it is not obliged to address these questions to prove adequate state protections.)

I have evidence for these premises below all from the Country of Origin Reports (can be used by RAT):



The Nigerian police are corrupt:
Any prosecutions which are brought as a result of police action will invariably be in favour of the wealthier party to the complaint.......Corruption was rampant, most often taking the form of bribes at highway checkpoints........Nigerian journalists yet again lived through an appalling year in 2006. They have had to face police brutality, arrests in certain cases for the least article that annoyed local authorities and corruption in the military, among politicians and businessmen........The attitude that torture is an accepted tool of interrogation appears to pervade all levels of the police force.”

The police are ineffectual in all aspects of policing:
“According to Nigerian police reform experts, the police force has insufficient well-trained manpower to adequately address policing needs.....The police have often been unable to meet the safety and security needs of local communities.....The police are poorly paid, poorly resourced, and are ill-equipped to deal with violent crime......"
This raises serious doubts as to the ability or willingness of the police to respond to the proposed request.

The Nigerian Citizenry has no confidence in the ability of the police to protect them:
The CLEEN foundation reports show extremely low rates of crime being reported to the police and little confidence and fear of the police at all levels.

There is little public confidence in the police. Indeed, they are criticized by virtually all sectors of civil society.......The loss of public confidence in the effectiveness of the police has resulted in the emergence of private security outfits and local vigilante groups........government actors including the police, military, and elected officials continued to commit serious and persistent abuses against Nigerian citizens.

The pervading cultural attitude to women and crime against women Nigeria makes it less likely for police to respond to alleged crimes against females.
women and men who go to the police to report cases of violence in the family, including rape and physical assault, are often met with a patronizing and discouraging attitude, ‘unless it is a case of the rape of a child or the husband kills his wife’.... Rape of women and girls by both the police and security forces, and within their homes and community, is acknowledged to be endemic in Nigeria.....The Nigerian authorities at both federal and state levels have failed to address adequately gender-based violence.

Police attitudes and general state protections towards FGM are not adequate:

No prosecutions for FGM in an entire year against FGM under state laws in Osun.

that there is a law banning FGM, but the NPF (Police) does not become involved in FGM matters, as ‘it is a family thing’.........social tolerance of gender-based violence in the family is replicated among Nigeria’s law enforcement officials.....…there is little state provision to support women facing domestic violence, female genital mutilation or trafficking. Where it exists it is inadequate....

The police force are not competent enough to publish official stats:
CLEEN has extrapolated statistics which show 128 cases of kidnapping recognised by the Nigerian Police.
In one of their surveys they found that .22% of people had been kidnapped.
This means that 1% of kidnaps make the police records.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I wouldnt trust anything from the Indo. (They previously made the bogus claims against Izevbeyai based on " a spokesman from immigration")

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 think not.

Some 140 applicants have now undergone the tests in order to verify their ethnic origin. Only one out of every five applicants tested are from where they claim.

So the RAC employ a language testing company when they strongly suspect
an asylum seeker of being from a different place. This found 112 peole to be bogusly claiming residency in a different state to their own.

From your post you would have gotten the impression that 80% of asylum seekers were failing this test. More like 2-3%. Bogus or accidental?

Is it possible to board an international flight in Lagos without presenting a passport? If not, how do so many asylum seekers managed to have "lost" all identifying documents by the time they arrive in Europe?

"So many"? How many?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

You were quite prepared to look up cases previously, when you thought that doing so would disprove my "nonsensicle" assertions. Now you are the one who is dodging, sidestepping, and being evasive.

Just list some cases or else drop it.

My charge against you is that every time you consider an asylum case, you find for the applicant and against the state. Unless you can provide me with at least one case in which you support the state's case for denying asylum, I'm afraid that charge stands. There are thousands of cases out there. You've said there are many you don't consider flawed. All you have to do is pick one.

If there are thousands then list some. Simple. You charged that The Irish Courts had found against Ms Izevbeyai and therefore she must be not entitled to asylum.

I provided one particular case (correct me if i'm wrong) to disprove your infallibility of the Irish courts theory. This does not mean I believe that the Irish courts always gets it wrong it just means I believe that they dont always get it right. If you believe that this one case means that I believe what you charge then PROVE IT.

If you believe your assertion about me is correct then all you have to do is list a few cases. Whats stopping you?

(No comment about the Nigerian Police evidence anymore, I notice.)

AlekSmart

Contrary to popular belief and myth, Ireland does not have one of the higher per capita percentages of immigrants or asylum seekers.

Thankfully that popular belief and myth provides a balance to the more arcane facts,figures and continual insistence by some that our Legal/Asylum systems are wrong,unfair or repressive.

I suppose you havent as an "ordinary native" evaluated the wastage in the design of the current asylum or evaluated the proposed new Bill to see how much wast is being addressed.

Have to hold my hands aloft here and admit that pressure of holding down a full time job has left me somewhat strapped for time to carry out a detailed comparison here.
However I`m relieved that in these straightened times our leaders have managed to fund the 5 additional High Court Judges deemed necessary to remove the backlog.

Why would you be called a racist? Presumably your not blaming foreigners for the design of our asylum system?

No thankfully I`ll allow the "foreigners" scot free on this one.
The blame such as it is rests squarely on the broad shoulders of the Irish Political and Guvermental system.

However that does not prevent a Racist tag being directed at most "natives" who express negativity at the present situation.

im not aware that she has been afforded anything she wasn't legally entitled to, are you?

Far from it,as I said Ms Izevbekhai has been afforded everything she is entitled to....and then some additional elements not afforded many others.

Whatever asylum seekers get they are entitled to under the Geneva convention.

Yes indeed,I am most appreciative of the term "entitlements" many people go through life having never been made aware of their full "entitlements" in a wide variety of fields.
Those who are most aware of their "entitlements" often exhibit a far lesser regard however for their responsibilities....in the general sense.

Sounds nice, but how exactly has the system bent in this case?

Perhaps by disregarding Ms Izvebekhai`s decision to go missing after her earlier lack of success..?
This of itself,surely demonstrates a certain lack of respect for the laws and procedures of her intended "new" home?

That dramatisation is your own. The cost in the asylum process our due to ineffiencies in it and not due to any "asylum" industry

Dramatisation it may well be,but the cause of our inefficiencies can,at least to some extent,be put down to having to deal with high levels of vexatious dealings with our system.
The fact that Minister Aherne is attempting to introduce a penalty charge upon Lawyers who can be shown to have frivolously represented their clients interests is dramatization enough for me.

Might it? I very much doubt it

Your doubt is noted,but I feel that a widespread realization that our system is unable to fund its own protective measures will attract the attention of those who cruise the Asylum Seas in search of suitable Safe Harbours.

You dont seem to anyway. Do you even know whos paying? Tell me who pays for the Legal representation of asylum seekers in the Refugee Commision?

Indeed,in the recent past Ireland had become a country where nobody appeared to care about the cost of anything.
No price was too great for anything we felt we needed.

However,this attitude has now vanished as people suddenly realize that everything has to be paid for.

That point was somewhat forcefully made on one of the fly-on-the-wall documentaries on Austrailia`s Border Policing.

It emerged during the processing of a Ukrainian national who had broken his Visa conditions that he would be levied a charge of $A125 PER DAY to cover the cost of his own detention whilst awaiting repatriation to Ukraine.

This cost would be entered as a Civil Debt on his record and would effectively have to be paid before he could legally return to Australia in the future.

Interestingly he waived his rights to pursue the Legal appeal channel in preference to an immediate repatriation.

Some would probably describe that as somewhow Grotesque,Unbelievable,Bizzarre or Unprecedented but thats how it worked for that lad....

Can`t see it being a runner here though.... Can you ?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

I asked you to provide one case in which you felt that an asylum denial was justified. You have now declined this request—by my count—eight times. I think my point is carried.

No I havent! (Still waiting for that list BTW). If youre too lazy to look up a few cases dont expect me to do it.

There's no point in arguing with your logical fallacies. I can provide you with plenty of evidence that some Gardaí here in Donegal have engaged in corrupt activities. But unlike you, I don't extrapolate that to the conclusion that the entire Garda Síochána police force is corrupt.

You know I wasnt extrapolating. My (Country of Origin) evidence was about the National Nigerian Police not any particular section of it. Im sure any open minded person who reads the evidence I listed against the Nigerian Police will be convinced of their inability to intervene to protect a child from kidnap.

I may have asked you this before but are you equating the Garda Siochana with the Nigerian Police Force?

Heres a few reminders about the Nigerian Police force as a whole. Jeez! Is Donegal really like this?


Any prosecutions which are brought as a result of police action will invariably be in favour of the wealthier party to the complaint.....Nigerian journalists yet again lived through an appalling year in 2006. They have had to face police brutality, arrests in certain cases for the least article that annoyed local authorities and corruption in the military, among politicians and businessmen........According to Nigerian police reform experts, the police force has insufficient well-trained manpower to adequately address policing needs.....The police have often been unable to meet the safety and security needs of local communities.....The police are poorly paid, poorly resourced, and are ill-equipped to deal with violent crime......The loss of public confidence in the effectiveness of the police has resulted in the emergence of private security outfits and local vigilante groups.......government actors including the police, military, and elected officials continued to commit serious and persistent abuses against Nigerian citizens.......Rape of women and girls by both the police and security forces, and within their homes and community, is acknowledged to be endemic in Nigeria.....The Nigerian authorities at both federal and state levels have failed to address adequately gender-based violence.

Danuogma

We can't afford to indulge in this nonsense anymore, the majority of "asylum seekers" are chancers, that is very apparent.

It is time we chartered a couple of dozen 747s and filled them.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

That office supplied the data on which the Independent story is based.

Who from OPAC supplied the data?

The Independent story states that "Only one out of every five applicants tested are from where they claim." I await your source for your counterclaim that only "2-3%" are lying about their country of origin.

Only 140 were tested. The RAC would not incur the expense of hiring in a Language recognition company for every single applicant, only the suspicious ones. What I said is not a counterclaim but is in line with the report stating that 112 people were found to be lying out of 140 suspected. What percentage is that of the total number of asylum seekers for that period. Is it 80%? Or more like 2-3%?


From the BBC:

quarters of all people claiming asylum at Heathrow say they have no documentation

They are claiming asylum in the UK not Ireland?
"some destroy their passports". Again, How many!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

AlekSmart wrote: »

Thankfully that popular belief and myth provides a balance to the more arcane facts,figures and continual insistence by some that our Legal/Asylum systems are wrong,unfair or repressive.

Yes I do feel the asylum system needs reform. I have stated where it varies with the UNCHR refugee handbook and how this in particular may cause the Irish Courts definition of Country of Origin "adequate state protections" to be accepted where no such protections really exist.

I have, to be fair, backed this and other assertions with (country of origin) evidence admissable in court. Maybe if you could back up the myth that Ireland does have one of the higher per capita percentages of immigrants or asylum seekers with suitable evidence then we could balance substantiated assertion with substantiated assertion?

One flaw is that at the RAC stage legal aid is not provided.
This means that applicants who fill out their questionnaire incorrectly must go into the long waiting list for appeal (with substantial costs).
Most applicants accepted at the appeal stage are from this category.
This is a massive waste of money.

Have to hold my hands aloft here and admit that pressure of holding down a full time job has left me somewhat strapped for time to carry out a detailed comparison here.

Fair enough although it should have limited your ability to comment on these matters in the first place.

However I`m relieved that in these straightened times our leaders have managed to fund the 5 additional High Court Judges deemed necessary to remove the backlog.

Maybe its more economical.

However that does not prevent a Racist tag being directed at most "natives" who express negativity at the present situation.

I'm sure you were easily able to refute these.
How exactly to you define an "ordinary" native by the way.

Perhaps by disregarding Ms Izvebekhai`s decision to go missing after her earlier lack of success..?

Who disregarded her decision?

This of itself,surely demonstrates a certain lack of respect for the laws and procedures of her intended "new" home?

Or a real desperation to keep her children from torture.
Hypothetically, would you break the law to save your children from torture? I know I would.

Dramatisation it may well be,but the cause of our inefficiencies can,at least to some extent,be put down to having to deal with high levels of vexatious dealings with our system.

Any vexacious dealings are a result of the inefficiencies I would say.

The fact that Minister Aherne is attempting to introduce a penalty charge upon Lawyers who can be shown to have frivolously represented their clients interests is dramatization enough for me.

Your doubt is noted,but I feel that a widespread realization that our system is unable to fund its own protective measures will attract the attention of those who cruise the Asylum Seas in search of suitable Safe Harbours.

Less and less asylum seekers are coming to Ireland. We turn away over 90%.

It emerged during the processing of a Ukrainian national who had broken his Visa conditions that he would be levied a charge of $A125 PER DAY to cover the cost of his own detention whilst awaiting repatriation to Ukraine.

This cost would be entered as a Civil Debt on his record and would effectively have to be paid before he could legally return to Australia in the future.

Interestingly he waived his rights to pursue the Legal appeal channel in preference to an immediate repatriation.

Some would probably describe that as somewhow Grotesque,Unbelievable,Bizzarre or Unprecedented but thats how it worked for that lad....

Can`t see it being a runner here though.... Can you ?

Illegal Immigrants and asylum seekers are not quite the same thing.
If the Australians tried that with Asylum Seekers they would get into trouble. Or wasnt that the point you were making?

T runner

Only 140 were tested. The RAC would not incur the expense of hiring in a Language recognition company for every single applicant, only the suspicious ones. What I said is not a counterclaim but is in line with the report stating that 112 people were found to be lying out of 140 suspected. What percentage is that of the total number of asylum seekers for that period. Is it 80%? Or more like 2-3%?

No Comment eh?

Still waiting for that list...........

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

HollyB

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I'd say that, in cases like that, when somebody had documentation when they got on the plane, if they don't have it when they arrive at their destination, they should be detained and returned to wherever they flew in from, unless they choose to get in touch with their embassies and make arrangements for replacement documentation to be supplied to them.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.