Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

ParkRunner

blackiebest wrote: »

If he has changed his story then why? In response to EF i am sure Pamela would be delighted to have Adrian, her 17 year old son, DNA tested if then people would accept the doctor is lying.

While the result of a DNA test would set in stone the credibility of the doctor, Pamela is also relying on an interview by this doctor so it would affect her case too. Either way i dont think the case should or will depend on this but i do think it could be a big factor if this doctor's evidence can be totally discounted and ensure the true facts are all that are presented to the ECHR and ruled on.

blackiebest

opo wrote: »

It would be a shame if your side hogged all the wacky conspiracy theories.

Can you prove it was the Doctor interviewed and not some individual set up for the purpose?

FFS, I have read what Philip Boucher Hayes of RTE reported in 05' and what the indo reported today. The doctor is a liar.

At this stage it is difficult to understand WTF is going on and I dont lend myself to conspiracy theories but the story as reported today is odd, as I said earlier when I know more I will let you know.

opo

blackiebest wrote: »

FFS, I have read what Philip Boucher Hayes of RTE reported in 05' and what the indo reported today. The doctor is a liar.

At this stage it is difficult to understand WTF is going on and I dont lend myself to conspiracy theories but the story as reported today is odd, as I said earlier when I know more I will let you know.

You have missed my point.

The lethemstay brigade is undeniably aggressive and unreasonable in disputing any statement from anyone with anything to do with this case, other than Ms.Izevbekhai who is breathlessly believed at all stages.

I am advancing the type of rubbish I have come to expect from these people in advance of another round of lies and delerious tangents that have little relation to fact.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

blackiebest

opo wrote: »

You have missed my point.

The lethemstay brigade is undeniably aggressive and unreasonable in disputing any statement from anyone with anything to do with this case, other than Ms.Izevbekhai who is breathlessly believed at all stages.

I am advancing the type of rubbish I have come to expect from these people in advance of another round of lies and delerious tangents that have little relation to fact.

Who are the Let them stay Brigade? I want Pamela to stay in Sligo so long as her story is substantially intact and frankly, if being put in 'sides' would be much happier to be on the one I am on rather than the substantial amount of hostile and ignorant posters of the 'send her home' persuasion.

I hate the sweeping generalizations of people and the adversarial nature of this subject. If Elizabeth was never born and never died from FGM then i think it is understandable that Pamela would be deported although I would rather she be allowed to stay for her daughters sake however if it is proven that her eldest daughter did die from FGM then i will be ashamed to be Irish if she is sent back to Nigeria.

ParkRunner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

While credibility will be an issue, I think if the doctor is discredited the whole case will revert (and rightly so) to the original argument as to whether Pamela's two children could live safely in Nigeria without being subjected to FGM. The Minister, relying on country of origin information, argued she could and the courts agreed, so I personally do not see any real merit in pursuing the credibility issues in Pamela's story, especially as the sources themselves have questionable credibility. The case can be won merely on the fact that internal relocation is possible, I dont see any need to complicate the issue.
Either we stick to independent facts or this case will get distorted in relation to who said what when and who can be believed.

opo

EF wrote: »

While credibility will be an issue, I think if the doctor is discredited the whole case will revert (and rightly so) to the original argument as to whether Pamela's two children could live safely in Nigeria without being subjected to FGM. The Minister, relying on country of origin information, argued she could and the courts agreed, so I personally do not see any real merit in pursuing the credibility issues in Pamela's story, especially as the sources themselves have questionable credibility. The case can be won merely on the fact that internal relocation is possible, I dont see any need to complicate the issue.
Either we stick to independent facts or this case will get distorted in relation to who said what when and who can be believed.

+1

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

blackiebest

If Elizabeth died from FGM by Tonys family then Pamela should not be sent back to Nigeria. The Nigerian Government (Minister of Justice, dont know his name) wishes to deny the practice of FGM exists at all!

You believe she should be sent back and relocated away from her in-laws while I would see this as inhumane and feel we should allow her to stay.

The report in todays papers was leaked in order to generate the type of reaction as witnessed here prior to it being presented to the Supreme court next week. It is fitting of this Government that they did not check out the kernel of the story which turns out to be a lying doctor who I believe is lying for fear for his own safety if he tells the truth. This is the nature of how Nigeria is governed today and you wish to see Pamela returned to the care of this same Government who have been embarrassed by Pamela!

Are you happy her kids will be safe?

opo

Perhaps a previous ECHR decision might help inform debate:


COLLINS and AKAZIEBIE - Sweden (No 23944/05)

Decision 8.3.2007 [Section III]



The applicants are Nigerian nationals. In 2002, the first applicant entered Sweden and applied for asylum or a residence permit. She alleged that according to Nigerian tradition, women were forced to undergo female genital mutilation (“FGM”) when they gave birth. As she was pregnant, she was afraid of this inhuman practice. Neither her parents nor her husband, who had supported her, could prevent this since it was such a deep-rooted tradition. She claimed that if she had travelled to another part of Nigeria to give birth to her child, she and her child would have been killed in a religious ceremony. Having decided to flee the country, she paid a smuggler, who took her to Sweden. Some months later, she gave birth to her daughter, the second applicant. The Migration Board rejected the applications for asylum, refugee status or a residence permit, stating, inter alia, that FGM was prohibited by law in Nigeria and that this prohibition was observed in at least six Nigerian states. Thus, if the applicants returned to one of those states it would be unlikely that they would be forced to undergo FGM. The applicants appealed unsuccessfully, maintaining that the practice of FGM persisted despite the law against it and had never been prosecuted or punished.



Inadmissible: It was not in dispute that subjecting a woman to female genital mutilation amounted to ill‑treatment contrary to Article 3. Nor was it in dispute that women in Nigeria had traditionally been subjected to FGM and to some extent still were. However, several states in Nigeria had prohibited FGM by law, including the state where the applicants came from. Although there was as yet no federal law against the practice of FGM, the federal government publicly opposed FGM and campaigns had been conducted at state and community level through the Ministry of Health and NGOs and by media warnings against the practice. Although there were indications that the FGM rate was higher in the south, including the applicants’ home state, according to the official sources, the FGM rate for the whole country in 2005 amounted to approximately 19%, a figure that had declined steadily in the past 15 years. Furthermore, while pregnant, the first applicant had not chosen to go to another state within Nigeria or to a neighbouring country, in which she could still have received help and support from her own family. Instead she had managed to obtain the necessary practical and financial means to travel to Sweden, having thus shown a considerable amount of strength and independence. Viewed in this light, it was difficult to see why she could not protect her daughter from being subjected to FGM, if not in her home state, then at least in one of the other states in Nigeria where FGM was prohibited by law and/or less widespread. The fact that the applicants’ circumstances in Nigeria would be less favourable than in Sweden could not be regarded as decisive from the point of view of Article 3. Moreover, the first applicant had failed to reply to the Court’s specific request to substantiate some of her allegations and to provide a satisfactory explanation for the discrepancies in her submissions. In sum, the applicants had failed to substantiate that they would face a real and concrete risk of being subjected to female genital mutilation upon returning to Nigeria: manifestly ill-founded.

My emphasis added.

I cannot see a single original angle for Izevbekhai based on this.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

EnigmasWhisper

blackiebest wrote: »

i will be ashamed to be Irish if she is sent back to Nigeria.

If she is indeed proven to be a liar and a fraud (as I suspect she will be) will you also be ashamed of being Irish considering your naive support of her and many more like her ?

More to the point do you think the majority of Irish people will be ashamed of you ?

ParkRunner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That is some amount of money spent on this one individual case in total, especially given the seriousness of our own economic problems.
Either the Minister knows more than he has released I reckon or yesterday's revelations could backfire and maybe even prolong an already exhausted battle.

blackiebest

EnigmasWhisper wrote: »

If she is indeed proven to be a liar and a fraud (as I suspect she will be) will you also be ashamed of being Irish considering your naive support of her and many more like her ?

More to the point do you think the majority of Irish people will be ashamed of you ?

If it is proven that Elizabeth was never born or never mutilated then Pamela should be deported. The only case I could be associated with is Pamelas as I happen to know her. If you bothered to read my posts on the subject you might adopt a more mature approach towards my opinion.

At this point the only person proven to be a liar and a fraud is the doctor everybody was so excited about yeaterday. It is also worth noting that there were only 55 deaths in Lagos in the year Elizabeth allegedly died, more so as her recorded death was the 56th!

Donegal, you are very knowledgeable on Nigeria, what is the population of LAgos, would 55 deaths for a 12 month period be normal for such a population. Not a loaded question but should be considered.

blackiebest

EF wrote: »

That is some amount of money spent on this one individual case in total, especially given the seriousness of our own economic problems.
Either the Minister knows more than he has released I reckon or yesterday's revelations could backfire and maybe even prolong an already exhausted battle.

I honestly would have thought we would be in the millions by now, wow suprisingly small for so much court action I would have thought. Add to that her 19euro a week + accomodation and we must be near the half million mark. If a risk exists to the two girls that would work out around 250,000 each or the price of some ****e semi D in Dromad. If the states case is based on corrupt information and if it si shown Pamela's case stands up, is it not worth it? With all the crap in this country and the billions squandered by so few gob****e corrupt IRISH bankers, politicans etc this is nothing in the scheme of things.

ParkRunner

blackiebest wrote: »

I honestly would have thought we would be in the millions by now, wow suprisingly small for so much court action I would have thought. Add to that her 19euro a week + accomodation and we must be near the half million mark. If a risk exists to the two girls that would work out around 250,000 each or the price of some ****e semi D in Dromad. If the states case is based on corrupt information and if it si shown Pamela's case stands up, is it not worth it? With all the crap in this country and the billions squandered by so few gob****e corrupt IRISH bankers, politicans etc this is nothing in the scheme of things.

Given the fact that Pamela has never been awarded her legal costs in court, it would be interesting to see how precisely her case is being funded. Either she has extraordinary personal wealth, her legal representatives can afford to take several High Court, Supreme Court and ECHR cases pro bono or there is quite a machine containing individuals with vested interests funding this.

Her upcoming Supreme Court case could become shambolic if the information relied upon in her SP application has come from a source which lacks all credibility. I just hope for everyone's sake the truth can actually be revealed as I have doubts that it ever can or will be. I think without the input of expert credible independent individuals, the truth cannot be established.

blackiebest

Her legal team are working pro bono form what I understand.

If the truth cannot be established as you suggest, do you think she should be given the benefit of the doubt?

ParkRunner

blackiebest wrote: »

Her legal team are working pro bono form what I understand.

If the truth cannot be established as you suggest, do you think she should be given the benefit of the doubt?

I simply find it impossible to believe that Pamela's legal team would pursue so many legal cases pro bono having lost every case so far and not had a cent awarded to them.

If the truth cannot be established about the facts of her case then I would give her the benefit of the doubt to the extent of believing that she did have a child who died as a result of FGM. However, I still think she can live safely in Nigeria.

While I don't doubt FGM does happen in Nigeria, there is independent credible information to say that people can escape FGM through internal location. That really is the crux of the issue for me.

AlekSmart

At this point the only person proven to be a liar and a fraud is the doctor everybody was so excited about yeaterday. It is also worth noting that there were only 55 deaths in Lagos in the year Elizabeth allegedly died, more so as her recorded death was the 56th!

Donegal, you are very knowledgeable on Nigeria, what is the population of LAgos, would 55 deaths for a 12 month period be normal for such a population. Not a loaded question but should be considered.

Blackiebest,the figure of 55 does NOT refer to Lagos as a whole.
The figure refers only to the Surulere DISTRICT of Lagos.
The inspection of the Deaths record by the Irish 3rd Secretary,Paul McHenry,showed 55 as the recorded figure.
However the Certificate presented by Ms Izevbekhai was numbered 56,and thus was an entry which did NOT exist in the register.

What needs to be clarified here is the actual identity of the persons purporting to be Dr Joseph Unokanjo.
I am assuming that the Doctor Unokanjo who swore the affidavit to the ECHR can be produced "Habeus Corpus" whilst the Dr Unokanjo who gave the Radio interview to Mr Boucher-Hayes remains forever lost ?

Ms Izevbekhai has been consistent in her ability to play fast and loose with the truth.
This would be a pre-requirement of the entire Human Trafficking process and thus probably well rehearsed by those controlling this event.
It can also be taken that,as Ms Izevbekhai was of somewhat considerable means in Nigerian terms,she and her husband would have engaged the services of a Trafficker of well proven abilities.

I believe the State has suddenly woken up to the huge ramifications of it`s Asylum Processes being seen to publically fail.
I wonder if perhaps there has been a change of personnell at the top of some of the Departments involved in this as we are seeing a subtly different approach here than heretofore.

One thing is for certain,the appearance on-stage of Dr Joseph Unokanjo now moves us into an area where verification of facts becomes somewhat easier which may not bode well for the Izevbekhai family and their Human Trafficker associates.

In the meantime I would advocate the Immediate deportation of Ms Izevbekhai pending the ECHR hearing.

It would be a very interesting point to see where she ended up.

rkeane

I'd be very confident now that we are on the final stretch with Pamela Izevbekhai .....her "case" was always full of holes, this is like an artillery shell in her campaign. She is now being shown to be the chancer that the vast majority believed she was. I understand the State is now going to furnish the evidence to the ECHR....this will almost certainly result in the case not being heard.

blackiebest

Alek,

I agree with most of your post. Really if Pamela has set us all up all these years then as I already stated she should be deported and as much as it pains me her beautiful kids will have to go through the ordeal also. I struggle to understand how you think she should be deported now, before the insane twist of the doctors id is cleared up. Surely this can not be difficult? A simple voice comparison would do it. If this would prove, as I hope it will, that it is the same person then surely you would agree that this doctor has changed his story for fear of his own safety? Surely NOTHING he now says should be given any weight.

Unlike what people here seem to assume I am no 'tree hugging soft emotional type' but knowing Pamela and then reading what people say about her is often difficult, but if you and the others are right, and she has been lying about Elizabeth etc. then I think untold damage has been done to anyone who has or could suffer FGM and their quest for safety.

I have no doubt there are elements in her story which may not be exactly as they happened and she is married to them now as it is recorded and part of her case however if her daughter did bleed to death having been mutilated then I as a parent understand why she fled her country and I as an Irish person believe we should offer her residency in our country.

I assume you are sure regarding the death information? This surely would also clarify the story. I am not aware of the date of death or the average number of deaths recorded in that 'district' but believe it is very likely that if the Goverment of Nigeria wishes to discredit Pamela and her story they are very capable of doing so including manipulating records. I feel all this information will bring this all to a head and only hope the 'send her packing' side of this arguement will be as open to facts as they emerge as I am. As stated earlier if Pamela had a daughter who died from FGM then we should allow her to stay here, if not she should be sent home.

Skatman

blackiebest wrote: »

If it is proven that Elizabeth was never born or never mutilated then Pamela should be deported. The only case I could be associated with is Pamelas as I happen to know her. If you bothered to read my posts on the subject you might adopt a more mature approach towards my opinion.

At this point the only person proven to be a liar and a fraud is the doctor everybody was so excited about yeaterday. It is also worth noting that there were only 55 deaths in Lagos in the year Elizabeth allegedly died, more so as her recorded death was the 56th!

Donegal, you are very knowledgeable on Nigeria, what is the population of LAgos, would 55 deaths for a 12 month period be normal for such a population. Not a loaded question but should be considered.

Just saw this from the website below, and as stated in previous posts the figure of 55 Deaths in Lagos State for children is far to low for any African country.

From AllAfrica.Com : http://allafrica.com/stories/200808010654.html we find a more true representation of Child deaths under the age of 5.

"Statistics show that there is a close relationship between the well-being of the mother and the health of the child. The mortality ratio for children under five years old in Nigeria is 230 per 1000 live births. This translates to the fact that, 16 children under five years die every ten minutes. Newborn deaths account for more than a quarter of these deaths especially within the first week of life due to pregnancy and delivery-related complications."

Though I will accept, that, this does not represent the number of FGM related deaths. It does however, cast a big question mark, on the figures provided by Paul McHenry, when he says
"Paul McHenry, third secretary at the Irish Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, describes how he had been shown that the registry of deaths in the Surulere district in Lagos for 1994 showed only 55 entries but the certificate produced for Elizabeth Izevbekhai was entered as number 56."

And yes, there still would not be that amount of deaths irrespective of the size of Surulere District in Lagos, back in 1994. Considering the current state of Medical Institutions at that time.

So I guess then, we still come down to the conclusion that, yes someone is lying, and Pamela has yet to be proven guilty at this moment.

Manic Moran

If it is proven that Elizabeth was never born or never mutilated then Pamela should be deported.

Why the change of heart? It makes no sense on anything but an emotional level.

Whether or not Elizabeth existed is irrelevant to the chances of the two real daughters' chances of avoiding FGM in Nigeria. It's not as if anyone in Nigeria who may be planning on it is going to say "They had no sister, so we won't do anything to her." In other words, nobody has ever really given any consideration to the living daughters' chances.

It seems to me that the wholesale change of position and support given these recent revelations is simply proof positive that the entire argument for letting her stay was based on an emotional level and had no consideration given for either logical thought or legal precedence.

NTM

Skatman

A majority of asylum cases are handled by Legal Aid, which all Asylum seekers in this country are entitled to. Hence, the same team covering Pamela's case are from that division as well.

As soon as an asylum seeker presents him/herself to the Justice dep, and claims asylum, then they are immediately offered Legal Aid that are based in the same offices as well.

Hence, why this case has been able to continue for this long.

djpbarry

EnigmasWhisper wrote: »

Hopefuly this ladies return to Nigeria will signal the beginning of some common sense in this country, and it will no longer be seen as a nation of idiots throwing money at them....dont get me started on our goverments plans to lease Hotels to house them.

Who is “them”? And what government plans are you referring to?

Victor_M wrote: »

Hopefully the outcome of this case will change the face of fraudulent asylum seeking in this country…

In what way?

Victor_M wrote: »

It's only a pity this turning point didn't come 6-8 years ago!

What turning point?

Yellowknife wrote: »

Is it not obvious that these people are jumping from one country to the next to get here?

Quite obvious, yes. But of course, that’s totally irrelevant.

Yellowknife wrote: »

Does anybody know if Mosney holiday camp still houses these people?

Depends what you mean by “these people”? Asylum seekers?

Yellowknife wrote: »

If so they all should have their cases scrutinised.

:rolleyes: I think that’s generally what happens with most asylum cases.

EF wrote: »

Even so I still think Pamela could safely live in Nigeria with her 2 daughters

With respect, how could you possibly know either way?

opo wrote: »

The lethemstay brigade is undeniably aggressive and unreasonable in disputing any statement from anyone with anything to do with this case, other than Ms.Izevbekhai who is breathlessly believed at all stages.

Likewise, there is a sizeable contingent on the other side who had their minds made up about Ms. Izevbekhai as soon as they became aware of her nationality.

EF wrote: »

I just hope for everyone's sake the truth can actually be revealed as I have doubts that it ever can or will be.

Often the case in asylum hearings, as official documents, etc. are difficult to obtain. If an individual is genuinely fleeing in fear of their lives, it’s highly unlikely that they are going to be in a position to gather all documentation that may be required for an asylum application prior to leaving their home country.

rkeane wrote: »

She is now being shown to be the chancer that the vast majority believed she was.

You believed this on the basis of?

blueythebear

Please bear with me if this gets a bit long but there's been so many posts by people who don't know anything about asylum.

First off, whether or not her child did die from FGM, Pamela Izevbekhai is NOT a refugee. Internal relocation is available in NIgeria, especially when the people who'd be seeking her are only her husband's family. The other thing is that there are laws against this practise in Nigeria although they're not specific to FGM, i think they're of a more general application. Maybe if the authorities were trying to FGM her children it would be a different story.

This fact does not say ANYTHING about Ireland's treatment of the issue of FGM. If Ms Izevbekhai's child did die from FGM and she was from a country whereby internal relocation was not available or if her circumstances were such that she could not internally relocate, the RAC or RAT would have definitely declared her a refugee. This is because the practise of FGM amounts to persecution and the fact that her child previously died from it means she has a legitimate fear that it will be done to her other children and Country of Origin Information confirms that FGM occurs in Nigeria. Therefore she fills all the criteria for being a refugee. The question that arises then is if internal relocation is possible and if it was not, then she would be declared a refugee. There are recent decisions from the RAT which have been positive involving applicants from Nigeria and FGM and this is because internal relocation was not possible.

It's very clear that she is not a refugee. However, the question then arises if she qualifies for Subsidiary Protection. The question asked here is if returning her would put her at serious risk of harm/torture/inhumane treatment. This is an application which is decided upon by the Minister for Justice, Equality & Law Reform and in my view is the relevant decision for her case.

If the FGM angle in this case is true, then you would feel she has a good case. If it's untrue however, she has no case and should be deported.

In the circumstances and without further information, I can't say if the FGM story is true. The news stories are not reporting everything and there are some discrepancies in the information. The issue of the doctor changing his story is very odd.

In relation to Nigeria itself, I think that it should be borne in mind that this country is not as safe as you all may think. There is a genuine armed conflict happening in the Niger Delta region at this time, homosexuals are persecuted throughout the country, interreligious conflicts kill hundreds each year and cause many problems for mixed marriage couples (religiously mixed, such as a Christian marrying a Muslim), women have little or no rights and are forced into marriages and are abused by their own families. All of this is exacerbated by the corrupt system in which the police, in addition to being open to bribery, refuse to invesigate any matter involving family conflicts and any matter involving spiritual/ritualistic elements. There are various cults operating throughout Nigeria and all have various rituals required to be carried out with severe consequences for those who fail to adhere including human sacrifice. Admittedly, many of these problems do not occur throughout the country but all i'm saying is that there are Nigerians who are genuinely fleeing persecution and that not all are bogus asylum seekers.

opo

blueythebear wrote: »

Please bear with me if this gets a bit long but there's been so many posts by people who don't know anything about asylum.

First off, whether or not her child did die from FGM, Pamela Izevbekhai is NOT a refugee. Internal relocation is available in NIgeria, especially when the people who'd be seeking her are only her husband's family. The other thing is that there are laws against this practise in Nigeria although they're not specific to FGM, i think they're of a more general application. Maybe if the authorities were trying to FGM her children it would be a different story.
.

No it would not. Pamela is not claiming she herself is escaping FGM for herself, therefore she can never be declared a refugee. The childern are a different matter.

blueythebear wrote: »

This fact does not say ANYTHING about Ireland's treatment of the issue of FGM. If Ms Izevbekhai's child did die from FGM and she was from a country whereby internal relocation was not available or if her circumstances were such that she could not internally relocate, the RAC or RAT would have definitely declared her a refugee. .

Completely incorrect. To be blunt, the dead cannot claim refugee status and she cannot transpose a threat already carried out on someone else onto herself no more than someone who has undergone FGM - cannot claim to be at risk of FGM.

blueythebear wrote: »

This is because the practise of FGM amounts to persecution and the fact that her child previously died from it means she has a legitimate fear that it will be done to her other children and Country of Origin Information confirms that FGM occurs in Nigeria. Therefore she fills all the criteria for being a refugee. The question that arises then is if internal relocation is possible and if it was not, then she would be declared a refugee. There are recent decisions from the RAT which have been positive involving applicants from Nigeria and FGM and this is because internal relocation was not possible..

There is absolutely no proof that FGM performed on one child leads to definite practice on another and this also assumes that Pamela did not permit a FGM procedure for her first child, in the first place.

I am no clearer on that fact now, than I ever was, thanks to the hysteria and general misinformation of her supporters.

blueythebear

opo wrote: »

No it would not. Pamela is not claiming she herself is escaping FGM for herself, therefore she can never be declared a refugee. The childern are a different matter.

Completely incorrect. To be blunt, the dead cannot claim refugee status and she cannot transpose a threat already carried out on someone else onto herself no more than someone who has undergone FGM - cannot claim to be at risk of FGM.

There is absolutely no proof that FGM performed on one child leads to definite practice on another and this also assumes that Pamela did not permit a FGM procedure for her first child, in the first place.

I am no clearer on that fact now, than I ever was, thanks to the hysteria and general misinformation of her supporters.

Opo, I'd like to state from the outset that I'm not a supporter of this woman and I don't know her from adam.

I agree with you in that Pamela is not a refugee for the reasons you cite above. You're right that it is not Pamela herself who is at risk of FGM so yes, she could never be a refugee on those grounds. The risk is to her children so it is her children claiming asylum in reality. However, if the children get to stay, then Pamela herself will get to stay. So in essence, all of the points thus far on the merits of the case should more correctly be addressed to the case of the children. I am not aware if Pamela's kids have their own individual asylum cases or if they come under hers.

As to your second point, you're right, the dead cannot be refugees. However, the fact that FGM has been carried out on one child is very relevant as it is evidence of past persecution and forms the basis of the persecution into the future for the other children. However, my comments in relation to internal relocation still apply.

As for your statement that the fact that FGM happened on one child doesn;t mean it'll happen to the others, I think that's pretty naive. FGM happens to all the females in the family, it's a cultural thing. We're dealing with a completely different set of cultural standards in Nigeria so because one child died does not mean the family won't try and do it again to the others.

As for her permitting the first child to undergo FGM, maybe she did permit it. Then when the family went to perform FGM on the other children she refused and they tried to force her. There's an awful lot of unknown information in this case.

Either way, she's not a refugee. Neither are her children. Perhaps the children are worthy of Subsidiary Protection, I don't have enough information to make such a call.

There were over 30 successful appeals before the RAT (from Nigerian applicants) in 2008 alone and I know of one that involved FGM, as I have seen the decision. All I'm saying in this is that not all Nigerians are involved in bogus asylum claims, some are genuine.

In relation to Ms Izebekhi, her situation has now become political and in the light of the uncertainty surrounding her claims I think it's inevitable that she will be deported and it is her own fault really for courting publicity as she has done.

ParkRunner

djpbarry wrote: »

With respect, how could you possibly know either way?

Often the case in asylum hearings, as official documents, etc. are difficult to obtain. If an individual is genuinely fleeing in fear of their lives, it’s highly unlikely that they are going to be in a position to gather all documentation that may be required for an asylum application prior to leaving their home country.

I am basing my opinion on independent credible country of origin information when I state that I believe Pamela could live safely with her children in Nigeria. Nobody could say I know 100% that she could live in Nigeria with her 2 children but the evidence says that internal relocation is possible to escape the threat of FGM.

In relation to the 2nd point, Pamela had several years to accumulate any documents she might need, if they even exist.

veronica

Yes...immediately by 'Raft' and the President should pay the cost for supporting her ...... What a soft touch we are in this country!