Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

gnxx

I've had a quick browse through this thread, but couldn't find an answer to this.

How has it taken so long to realise that documents at the core of this case are fake?

Surely somebody should have checked the basic information before this case became high profile ( and costly ).

ParkRunner

Big_Mac wrote: »

As slight digression here, some interesting quotes from his bebo page:


Sort of explains his leaving cert results doesn't it? Peace out indeed!

Got a link to this? It is pretty serious if he is intending to reside in England now and yet still be entitled to the same benefits as Irish citizens here(i.e. social welfare).

doomedtofail

Big_Mac wrote: »

There's a 'normal' route to fradulently seeking asylum?

No the normal route for pursuing economic immigration as opposed to relieving your intended host country of E500,000 with a fabricated litany of lies.

Big_Mac

EF wrote: »

Got a link to this? It is pretty serious if he is intending to reside in England now and yet still be entitled to the same benefits as Irish citizens here(i.e. social welfare).

For your pleasure: Linky

Pedro K

I've read the last few pages of this thread with great interest. No way was I going to sieve through 130 pages of it though!

In my opinion, The let them stay brigade is based purely on circumstance. What might happen (even though I'm of the opinion, as are others, that the FGM most likely won't happen to these kids)

The argument for deportation is based on fact. She came here illegally, wasted a tonne of money defrauding the irish people and should be sent back from where she came as soon as possible.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

herya

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Wow. How can you check the validity of somebody's claims if you can't verify the documents presented? Baffled!

blackiebest

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Wow, this I did not know. I am now confused, does this mean the Gardai may not question any documents provided in support of an asylum application so long as the case is undecided or under appeal through the court system? I would be very interested in this and would appreciate any references etc, I suspect Alek would know more about this?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jmcc

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No wonder Terry Prone was qualifying her support for Boucher-Hayes.

Regards...jmcc

HollyB

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So the RAC, RAT and the courts essentially have to assume that documentation provided to them is genuine, on the word of the applicant, because their hands are tied when it comes to investigating the validity of the documentation?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

HollyB

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

And even that would be an open invitation for appeals; if somebody's documentation is deemed to be a forgery by the expert in question, and that is put down as the reason, or even a small part of the reason why the applicant is not eligible for asylum, they could use that as grounds to appeal, insisting that the documentation was real and that it should not have been dismissed as evidence, etc.

T runner

HollyB wrote: »

So the RAC, RAT and the courts essentially have to assume that documentation provided to them is genuine, on the word of the applicant, because their hands are tied when it comes to investigating the validity of the documentation?

The RAT etc can regard or disregard evidence as they see fit. There has been criticism of the RAT in the past for disregarding medical reports presented by victims of state torture. In the case of the Izevbekhais, the evidence was disregarded by the RAT as not germane to the case. This is perhaps why the gardai did not investigate. Perhaps they could not reveal any evidence of possible contact with the Nigerian authorities until this point?

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

19. —(1) The Commissioner, the Appeal Board, the Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and their respective officers shall take all practicable steps to ensure that the identity of applicants is kept confidential.


(2) Subject to sections 9 (15) and 26, no matter likely to lead members of the public to identify a person as an applicant under this Act shall be published in a written publication available to the public or be broadcast without the consent of that person and the consent of the Minister (which shall not be unreasonably withheld).


(3) If any matter is published or broadcast in contravention of subsection (2), the following persons, namely—


( a ) in the case of a publication in a newspaper or periodical, any proprietor, an editor and any publisher of the newspaper or periodical,


( b ) in the case of any other publication, the person who publishes it, and


( c ) in the case of matter broadcast, any person who transmits or provides the programme in which the broadcast is made and any person having functions in relation to the programme corresponding to those of the editor of a newspaper,


shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £1,500 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to both.

I would argue that an investigation would show that the Irish authorities and others failed in protecting the applicants in this case (and others) under this Act.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Big_Mac

T runner wrote: »

19. —(1) The Commissioner, the Appeal Board, the Minister, the Minister for Foreign Affairs and their respective officers shall take all practicable steps to ensure that the identity of applicants is kept confidential.


I would argue that an investigation would show that the Irish authorities and others failed in protecting the applicants in this case (and others) under this Act.

How so? is it because of the amount of public attention that has been awarded to this case?

If so, why would you soely hold the state at fault for this? Would you not think that Pamela and the people of letthemstay.org is responsible for the media campaign that has gathered so much momentum over the last number of years?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

rkeane

I see T runner has come back to the party, I bet he's not too happy its a death cert that Pamela is going to be deported. Her claim has been found to be totally without merit, to the point that she doesn't even have legal representation. The Minister will have her out of here in no time....you can be assured that there will be no granting of leave to remain in this case.

HollyB

rkeane wrote: »

I see T runner has come back to the party, I bet he's not too happy its a death cert that Pamela is going to be deported. Her claim has been found to be totally without merit, to the point that she doesn't even have legal representation. The Minister will have her out of here in no time....you can be assured that there will be no granting of leave to remain in this case.

At this point, I wouldn't count on anything until the Izevbekhai family are actually on a plane back to Nigeria.

For those familiar with the legal situation, can Pamela appeal to the Supreme Court for her case - and her deportation - to be postponed while she seeks new legal representation, since her legal team have sought to withdraw from the case, or can her legal team be refused permission to withdraw from the case at this stage?

The Corinthian

T runner wrote: »

I would argue that an investigation would show that the Irish authorities and others failed in protecting the applicants in this case (and others) under this Act.

As donegalfella has pointed out, she didn't exactly seek to stay out of the public light and given that, I suspect that it could well be within the capabilities of the government to show they had taken all practicable steps to ensure that the identity of applicants is kept confidential.

Isn't what you are suggesting just a little bit cynical though, if this is a justification in your eyes for letting her stay?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

TREVOR H

Why would a person who requires asylum travel the whole way accross Europe to claim asylum in little old Ireland?
Surely this woman had done some research before she picked Ireland.
Why did she pick Ireland?

FGM is a sick act but should we accept everyone who claims that they are fleeing this.
It would appear that this woman is just using FGM as a means to claim asylum but who knows she might find some proof of her daughters death.
If she is proven to be a fraud she should be put on a plane the same day.

The real victims of bogus refugee cases are the 'real' asylum seekers.
These cheats clog up the system for the people who really need our help.

This case aside, how can Ireland accept refugees from countries that we have diplomatic relations with?
It doesn't make sense.

AlekSmart

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/izevbekhai-in-desperate-hunt-for-evidence-of--asylum-claims-1691980.html

This piece from the Irish Independent would appear to indicate that there`s yet more to come from our Pamela.

Reporter Anita Guidera reveals that a "Friend" of Ms Izevbekhai`s,standing in for an "unavailable" Pamela,reveals that Ms Izevbekhai is "working intensely" with "contacts" to come up with contradictory evidence to refute the revelations of the past 72 hours.

However,this quote caught my eye:

In a brief interview with the Sligo-based radio station Ocean FM, Ms Izevbekhai said she wanted everyone to know she had not lied.

"There are things I can't say now but, believe me, I did not lie," she said.

Now what I wonder are the "Things" she cannot speak of ?

Surely at this stage Ms Izevbekhai MUST come clean about EVERY facet of her claims thus far.
At this juncture it is not impossible for the LTS campaign to come up with some grand Media stunt which,after all, would sit quite well with the modus oporandi of a Feminist Oriented support group which describes itself as being "On The Front Line".

This entire circus needs to be packed up and taken out of town NOW,before it manages to spread the disinformation and speculation which it now desperately requires to ensure the survival of this form of right-on advocacy.

I have little doubt but that Ms Izevbekhai`s return to Nigeria will be suitably brief and that in the fullness of time,She,her Businessman husband and his extensive contacts will surface again on some foreign shore...perhaps even back on or own doorstep.

GuanYin

OK, in case the last few pages of tirades have removed sense from the posters here, the following will get you banned straight away from the politics forum.

1. Libelous accusations.
2. Any accusation that has not yet been proven.
3. Racism.
4. Misrepresentation of immigration law.


I'm going to look through the last few pages and I WILL retroactively ban anyone who has posted anything in the list above.

If you have, I suggest you delete it now.

Also, this isn't a soapbox for racists and xenophobes so if you have comments of that nature, keep them to yourself or go post on stormfront.

(two posts preceding this one have been deleted on this basis).

Finally, read the charter before you think about replying to this.

opo

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I had a vague recollection of events - it took me a while to find this but this is the context in relation to the identity of the individual:


http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0540/D.0540.200107030319.html


Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform (Mr. O'Donoghue): Section 19 of the Refugee Act, 1996, provides the legislative basis for ensuring that the identity of an applicant for asylum is kept confidential by all involved in the application process. This is an essential safeguard for the protection not only of applicants themselves but also of their relatives left behind in the country where persecution may have arisen. In that regard, section 19(1) of the Act places an onus on a number of parties including the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, the Refugee Applications Commissioner, the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and their respective officers to take all practicable steps to keep confidential the identity of applicants for refugee status. Section 19(2) provides that subject to sections 9(15) and 26, no matter likely to lead members of the public to identify a person as an applicant for refugee status under Act shall be published or broadcast without the consent of the person and the consent of the Minister, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.

354

While I am satisfied that the prohibition on the publication or broadcast of material, without an applicants consent, is justified in the interests of the protection of the asylum seeker, I indicated earlier this year that, in line with practice in other EU member states, I proposed to take advantage of the next suitable legislative opportunity to bring forward an amendment to section 19(2) solely to remove the requirement of the Minister's consent. The National Union of Journalists wrote welcoming my announcement and at that time an acknowledgement issued from my office. It is my intention subject to Government approval, to bring forward the necessary amendment to section 19(2) of the Refugee Act, 1996, in the framework of the Immigration (Carriers [354] Liability) Bill at present in course of preparation and which I expect will be published shortly. My office is writing to the National Union of Journalists advising them of the up to date position.

Essentially, we were out of kilter with other jurisdictions and McDowell was accused of suppressing asylum seekers by having to give his consent to them to go public.

Presumably, if he was advised that there were serious credibility or other relevant issues, he previously had the power to refuse consent.

Of course, , the meeja felt repressed and lobbied for the change and we can all see how well and responsibly they have responded to this measure when left unchecked.

ParkRunner

Here is a copy of what asylum applicants receive when making an application for refugee status

http://www.inis.gov.ie/en/INIS/ORACInfoLeaflet.pdf/Files/ORACInfoLeaflet.pdf

It could be useful in clearing up a few of the queries I have seen recently posted. Rights and obligations exist and there is an emphasis on credibility.

Trouser_Press

[quote=AlekSmart;59637394] ..... to come up with some grand Media stunt which,after all, would sit quite well with the modus oporandi of a Feminist Oriented support group.... [/quote]

John Waters? Is that you?

Ah AlekSmart, the mask slipped....."Feminist Oriented support group" = Satan! Just a pity you can't spell. Not that I'm suggesting you're thick, or anything.

rkeane

corrocot1 wrote: »

Goodbye Pamela,
You were caught lying after costing us taxpayers over 1 million euro, now get the hell out of my country.
Edward Smith.

Did you sign up just for that comment? Very few people in here support Ms Izevbekhai.....but did you really have to make that your first comment?

I for one am eager to see her deported btw.

Big_Mac

Interesting comments from this article

Yesterday, she was unavailable to be interviewed but a friend confirmed she was working intensely with contacts in Nigeria to come up with independent evidence that would contradict the revelations of several days ago.

I wonder what they will come up with. Maybe she got an email from one of the 419'ers and they will help her.

"Her whole life dissolved in front of her. When it came out that some of the paperwork was not real, it shattered her totally. She could not understand why Tony [her husband] had done it and had not told her.

Sorry, this I don't buy. Nor do I believe that a wealthy family could not afford to pay the fees that the doctor wanted to obtain the genuine documentation (if existed)

"Our concern has always been for the safety of the girls and for Pamela in Nigeria and we continue to have those concerns. Pamela can be assured that we will stick by her until some form of protection is provided by the Irish state."

The LHS brigade are saying that their concerns are for Pamela and the girls in Nigeria. erm... they're currently in Ireland.
They will stick by her until some form of protection is provided by the Irish state - Does this mean that they have accepted the almost certainty of her deportation and they just want to have 'protection' for them in Nigeria?