Pamela Izevbekhai - Should She Be Deported?

PaulieBoy

rkeane wrote: »

Breaking News: Pamela Izevbekhai has a cold,

Best thing for a cold is good sunshine. A lot of that in Nigeria.

AlekSmart

Breaking News: Pamela Izevbekhai has a cold, the case has been put back for another month.

Is this for real...?
If so then I am left wondering just how definite Ms Izevbekhai`s Legal Representation actually is.
I presume the Court requires some form of Doctors Certificate to cover this absence......but given this particular lady`s affinity with the Medical proffession,perhaps the Court might waive this ?

walshb

cabinteelytom wrote: »

gullible our public figures, politicians, legislators and journalists, truly are.

Demand transparency in respect of asylum claims, and awards! Let's have accountability.

This is not gullible at all. These people know damn well
the rights and wrongs. It's all well thought out and planned
"support."

Politicians using it as a political football and solicitors using it
as a means to earn serious cash. Journalists making a name
for themselves and selling column inches! None are genuine in their
support here. It's a well elaborated plan and nothing gullible at all.

jmcc

AlekSmart wrote: »

Is this for real...?

No. I don't think it is. The case was listed for mention before the Supreme Court this morning.

Regards...jmcc

paddyboy23

rkeane wrote: »

Breaking News: Pamela Izevbekhai has a cold, the case has been put back for another month.

You never know with this woman, she is very good at getting short hearings.

hope she can travel with her dose as far as nigera at least

ParkRunner

No new papers have been put in my Pamela anyway so it seems she cannot rebut the documents submitted by the State and we can finally get back to the legal arguments about whether someone who claims to be at risk from having fgm performed on them or their daughters can successfully apply for protection abroad.
As she lied and insisted that her first daughter existed and died from FGM, without being able to produce any solid evidence, we really are dealing with an abstract case here. The let them stay brigade have learned a harsh lesson here

walshb

EF wrote: »

able to produce any solid evidence, we really are dealing with an abstract case here. The let them stay brigade have learned a harsh lesson here

The let them stay brigade will learn nothing. These folks aren't interested in the facts or evidence, they want her to stay regardless. They knew all along that the case
was a fraud, but for whatever reasons, they kept pushing and still are.


RAR are the same. They don't care about the facts. Their job is to promote
refugees and asylum seekers no matter what and to try to ensure that
ALL are allowed to stay regrardless what the burden or cost is to society!

We all know the solicitors will milk it for every penny they can
get with appeal after appeal after appeal. It's simply
a gravy train to these!

Zambia

Funny (not really) isnt it that in %90 of african countries PI and her kids could live like the queen of Sheeba for life, for a fraction of the legal cost of this process.

AlekSmart

Funny (not really) isnt it that in %90 of african countries PI and her kids could live like the queen of Sheeba for life, for a fraction of the legal cost of this process.

Not for the first time has Zambia232 posted a very pertinent opinion.

The Izevbekhai case has never been one of merit.

It has been flagged from day one as a piece of opportunistic carpet bagging perpretrated NOT alone by Pamela Izevbekhai but by a coterie of hangers on,supporters and more importantly,other INTERESTED parties each keen to expand their own area of influence.

It has exposed the major flaw in both our asylum process and,more importantly,our entire legal system,whereby it`s mechanisms no longer operate with the Law or Public Good in mind.

Instead,our Legal system operates in the same manner as the State`s own Administration,caught in the glare of the Politically Correct headlights and thus rendered virtually impotent against members of any,race,religion or caste which differs from our own.

Pamela Izevbekhai has not yet admitted her defeat,if thats what it will be.
I remain uncertain that the State will maintain the attitude so badly NEEDED in order to ensure the next vexatious,frivolous litigant is warned off !!

sovtek

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I guess that's why immigrants pay way more into the system than they can ever take out.


http://www.tcf.org/list.asp?type=PB&pubid=491

Fact!

rkeane

Stay on topic please! What the hell has a generalised comment about immigrants got to do with this case involving Pamela Izevbekhai. This woman has contributed nothing to our economy.....she with the help of others has cost this country a fortune.

O'Coonassa

rkeane wrote: »

What the hell has a generalised comment about immigrants got to do with this case involving Pamela Izevbekhai.

Well she's an immigrant you see....and her case features that fact fairly heavily. It's quite amazing you've failed to notice this :rolleyes:

rkeane

O'Coonassa wrote: »

Well she's an immigrant you see....and her case features that fact fairly heavily. It's quite amazing you've failed to notice this :rolleyes:

Yes but the comment was directed at productive, law-abiding immigrants.... Pamela Izevbekhai displays none of those characteristics.

O'Coonassa

rkeane wrote: »

Yes but the comment was directed at productive, law-abiding immigrants.... Pamela Izevbekhai displays none of those characteristics.

She was given a chance to be productive do you think?

We're a generally law abiding nation when it comes to not pulling the wool over the eyes of the authorities do you think?

Everybody pays their TV license and would never dream of lying to the social etc? The political and business class all quite straightforward in their dealings?

walshb

O'Coonassa wrote: »

She was given a chance to be productive do you think?

We're a generally law abiding nation when it comes to not pulling the wool over the eyes of the authorities do you think?

Everybody pays their TV license and would never dream of lying to the social etc? The political and business class all quite straightforward in their dealings?

Yeah, we have damn enough of our own Irish scammers without importing them in and spending milions then trying to kick them out!
The woman has had her day(s) in court, enough is bloody enough!

KINGVictor

rkeane wrote: »

Stay on topic please! What the hell has a generalised comment about immigrants got to do with this case involving Pamela Izevbekhai. This woman has contributed nothing to our economy.....she with the help of others has cost this country a fortune.

How have they contributed to the 4.1 billion euros loss of the Anglo Irish bank or the €4 billion that the govt is giving them...be realistic my friend.

It was Ireland's choice when she thought that it had become a superpower overnight in the early 90's to start competing with other europeans on who could take on more asylum seekers...now reality hits home about some of the attached responsibilities and you decide to back out ...its not that simple...once you take one in ...they are going to naturally bring their kindred...just like the Irish people did when we went to the US....get over it.

O'Coonassa

walshb wrote: »

spending milions then trying to kick them out!

There in a nutshell is the sheer stupid thickness of the whole case. She's a qualified financial services professional who all this time could've been paying tax.

Souljacker

I honestly don't think there's a straight forward answer to this question, the huge number of posts is proof of that.


The reality is we live in a f**ked up world. We produce enough food on this planet to feed the world's population 1 & 1/2 times over yet 5 million people starve to death each year and half of the world's population suffers from malnutrition.

Immigrants come to countries like this one because they want a better life, for them and their (future) children. We get to live in a consumer cushy society because children in China work 16 hour days in sweat shops to make goods. People will go to where the resources are that's not going to change because of a single court case.

Inequality is the single biggest reason people come to rich countries like this one, if we want to seriously tackle the issue of illegal immigration global action is needed to make sure we provide the minimum standards for every single person on this planet. i.e the right to live, the right to sustainable housing and the right to food.

Should this woman and her two children who've spent most of their life in this country be deported? No. The fact that we've invested so much in these children's education for me is reason enough to not deport them.

rkeane

Souljacker wrote: »

I honestly don't think there's a straight forward answer to this question, the huge number of posts is proof of that.


The reality is we live in a f**ked up world. We produce enough food on this planet to feed the world's population 1 & 1/2 times over yet 5 million people starve to death each year and half of the world's population suffers from malnutrition.

Immigrants come to countries like this one because they want a better life, for them and their (future) children. We get to live in a consumer cushy society because children in China work 16 hour days in sweat shops to make goods. People will go to where the resources are that's not going to change because of a single court case.

Inequality is the single biggest reason people come to rich countries like this one, if we want to seriously tackle the issue of illegal immigration global action is needed to make sure we provide the minimum standards for every single person on this planet. i.e the right to live, the right to sustainable housing and the right to food.

Should this woman and her two children who've spent most of their life in this country be deported? No. The fact that we've invested so much in these children's education for me is reason enough to not deport them.

You're entitled to your opinion but I think you will find that 99% of people want an example made of Pamela Izevbekhai. Her case is absolutely without foundation and bogus in the extreme. This case features undeniable facts of forgery, lies and deception, I genuinely feel for the kids, but they can hold their mother responsible for this mess. She is lucky that the State SC seems content to simply deport her to Nigeria, they could quite easily initiate a prosecution against her for uttering false documents to the courts.

Souljacker

rkeane wrote: »

You're entitled to your opinion but I think you will find that 99% of people want an example made of Pamela Izevbekhai. Her case is absolutely without foundation and bogus in the extreme. This case features undeniable facts of forgery, lies and deception, I genuinely feel for the kids, but they can hold their mother responsible for this mess. She is lucky that the State SC seems content to simply deport her to Nigeria, they could quite easily initiate a prosecution against her for uttering false documents to the courts.

So as long as we as a state do not have to bear the responsibility for uprooting 2 children who we've educated and gave a home to it's ok to send them on their way with nothing to go to and never to return?

That doesn't sit well with me, but I can only speak for myself.

The only point I wanted to make is that people will follow the resources. Asylum seekers and immigrants come to resource rich countries to make a better life and in a world where 1/2 of the people on this planet suffer from malnutrition? The court case isn't going to open the flood gates. Abject inequality & war and deprivation mean those who have the means will do anything to make a better life.


Look at the amount of immigrants Ireland has produced. There are 10,000s of 1st generation Irish people living illegally in America, many of who have families settled there. I wonder would we be so harsh if an Irish mother lied to keep her children over there?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

opo

Souljacker wrote: »

I wonder would we be so harsh if an Irish mother lied to keep her children over there?

I would suspect that if an Irish mother claimed that her fellow citizens, family or otherwise, were itching to hunt down and mutilate her childerns genitals if they ever set foot on any part of Irish soil, for purely economic reasons, we would be less than sympathetic.

If that same mother entered the asylum process and supported her claim with false documenatation, rather than keeping her bloody head down and working, we might even be outraged and demand her expulsion as an example to those who would smear an entire nation as mindless savages, for personal gain.

opo

Souljacker wrote: »

The only point I wanted to make is that people will follow the resources. Asylum seekers and immigrants come to resource rich countries to make a better life and in a world where 1/2 of the people on this planet suffer from malnutrition? The court case isn't going to open the flood gates. Abject inequality & war and deprivation mean those who have the means will do anything to make a better life.

Yet another person who thinks fake asylum seekers and law abiding immigrants are somehow indistinguishable and that every other problem in the world (out of our control) is priority over managing immigration (within our control) in a way that is sustainable, democratically acceptable and therefore, reasonably conflict free.

The Raven.

Souljacker wrote: »

So as long as we as a state do not have to bear the responsibility for uprooting 2 children who we've educated and gave a home to it's ok to send them on their way with nothing to go to and never to return?

That doesn't sit well with me, but I can only speak for myself.

You are obviously not very familiar with the Izevbekhai case. If you took the time to read this thread from the beginning, you would find that what you have said is totally inaccurate. Ms. Izevbekhai was quite well off before she came to Ireland. She had a wealthy husband, and a good job in a bank. She lived in a large house with several maids: 'nothing to go to' indeed :rolleyes:??

The only point I wanted to make is...

There is more than one point there, and we have had all of these already, repeated ad nauseum !!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

AlekSmart

She's a qualified financial services professional who all this time could've been paying tax.

I think there may well be a question mark over this aspect of Ms Izevbekhai`s background also.
I recall a small piece in one of the Sunday Times articles alluding so some difficulty their reporter was having in verifying the "professional" nature of Ms Izevbekhai`s financial services career. (I cant find the piece now,but I`m sure somebody will be along ijn a tic......)

Souljacker said....

So as long as we as a state do not have to bear the responsibility for uprooting 2 children who we've educated and gave a home to it's ok to send them on their way with nothing to go to and never to return?

That doesn't sit well with me, but I can only speak for myself.

The Izevbekhai children have been treated with the utmost care and dignity by the Irish State acting according to the Constitutional imperative regarding the cherishing of the child.

Deporting Ms Izevbekhai and HER children now is most certainly NOT "sending them on their way with nothing".

In the 4 years since their mother brought them here they have benefited from our education and welfare system and from the interaction with other children.

The Izevbekhai girls are most certainly not required to bear the guilt for their parents actions (They DO have a Father also,who remains discreetly off stage)

It is always open for the entire Izevbekhai family to apply to re-enter the State LEGALLY,in the same manner as many of her fellow Nigerians.

So whilst I respect your unease with the above scenario,I am very comfortable with the State following through on its perogative.

There are 10,000s of 1st generation Irish people living illegally in America, many of who have families settled there. I wonder would we be so harsh if an Irish mother lied to keep her children over there?

This

Irish in America

debate has ebbed and flowed a bit throughout this thread,but is,I feel of little relevance to it.

To be blunt about it,I have little time for Irish Politicians attempting to "Make a Case" for undocumented Irish living and working Illegally in the USA.

It should be borne in mind that the bulk of the "undocumented" Irish represent the cream of the crop of what we were constantly told were the best educated,highly motivated young people in Europe.

Indeed,so well were they educated,that the signing of legal documents to gain admission to the US on tourist or study Visa`s never registered as an important item....?

It is up to those INDIVIDUALS to make their own case to the U.S Authorities and to fight their own fight,but please,do me the honour of not portraying them as some vast lost tribe of young oppressed Irish struggling to escape the jackboot of an oppressive State.

Should this woman and her two children who've spent most of their life in this country be deported? No. The fact that we've invested so much in these children's education for me is reason enough to not deport them.

I would most definitely say Yes to their deportation and would hope that the investment in the Izvbekhai girl`s education will stand them in good stead for the future....However it should also be realized that the Nigerian Education system,at the Izevbekhai`s Social Level is far from the hedge school which some appear keen to portray it as. (Having benefitted from a long and very beneficial involvement with the Irish Christian Brothers and other religious Orders).

johnathan woss

Souljacker wrote: »

The reality is we live in a f**ked up world. We produce enough food on this planet to feed the world's population 1 & 1/2 times over yet 5 million people starve to death each year and half of the world's population suffers from malnutrition.

Immigrants come to countries like this one because they want a better life, for them and their (future) children. We get to live in a consumer cushy society because children in China work 16 hour days in sweat shops to make goods. People will go to where the resources are that's not going to change because of a single court case.

Inequality is the single biggest reason people come to rich countries like this one, if we want to seriously tackle the issue of illegal immigration global action is needed to make sure we provide the minimum standards for every single person on this planet. i.e the right to live, the right to sustainable housing and the right to food.

Should this woman and her two children who've spent most of their life in this country be deported? No. The fact that we've invested so much in these children's education for me is reason enough to not deport them.

I must say it's very generous of you to offer to continue to give this woman and her children more of MY money.

As you seem to be saying that it is our collective responsibility to house and feed all the poor people in the world, no matter how many children they choose to have, may I ask you what have YOU done to address these terrible global problems ?

I hope you don't scurry off under a rock like O'Coonassa does when I ask him questions in this vein.

Souljacker

opo wrote: »

Yet another person who thinks fake asylum seekers and law abiding immigrants are somehow indistinguishable and that every other problem in the world (out of our control) is priority over managing immigration (within our control) in a way that is sustainable, democratically acceptable and therefore, reasonably conflict free.

No you've missed my point which simply is to counter the argument that this court case was a Pandora’s box. I think that notion is ridiculous given that 1/2 of the world’s population lives in abject poverty without enough food to eat.

I am not and have not suggested that we completely open up our doors to everyone and anyone who wants to come here, only making the point that this is a hugely unequal world we live in (which is in no way based on egalitarianism) and that is the main reason for illegal immigration into this and other resource rich countries.

On a grand scale I'm not suggesting there is any quick fix, or easy solution but the life most of us live in this country is dependent on others being exploited. That is the sad reality. (Before anyone accuses me of claiming any moral high ground I include myself in that exploitation).

With regards to this individual case, I've stated that it doesn't sit well with me that we should punish these children for something their mother has done. It doesn't feel right for me to deport these children, they've done nothing to deserve to face such uncertainty. I make absolutely no apology for feeling this way.

Whatever way you look at it, or whoever you assign the blame to the reality is we are turning these children (we've put so much energy into) away from our country. Maybe we can't change the world but why can't we give these children the stability every child deserves?

opo

Souljacker wrote: »

With regards to this individual case, I've stated that it doesn't sit well with me that we should punish these children for something their mother has done. It doesn't feel right for me to deport these children, they've done nothing to deserve to face such uncertainty. I make absolutely no apology for feeling this way.

Whatever way you look at it, or whoever you assign the blame to the reality is we are turning these children (we've put so much energy into) away from our country. Maybe we can't change the world but why can't we give these children the stability every child deserves?

Punish the Childern?

Are you kidding?

Are maids/big homes the norm in Nigeria?

When it comes to Africans, I believe it is the richest and the best resourced individuals of all who exploit our asylum provisions ruthlessly.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you are being one bit fair in universally pre-judging a childs life in Nigeria, regardless of status, as innately inferior to one in Ireland. In any other context, this would be simply denounced as racism.

Souljacker

johnathan woss wrote: »

I must say it's very generous of you to offer to continue to give this woman and her children more of MY money.

As you seem to be saying that it is our collective responsibility to house and feed all the poor people in the world, no matter how many children they choose to have, may I ask you what have YOU done to address these terrible global problems ?

I hope you don't scurry off under a rock like O'Coonassa does when I ask him questions in this vein.

1. Yes as a humanist I am saying it's our collective responsibility to make sure that every man woman and child has the basic human right to shelter, food and life. Why do you not think this is something worth striving for?

2. I'm not claiming the moral high ground as I've included myself in the section of people who exploit those to live the life most of us do in this country.

3. I'm voicing my opinion not doing anything to you tax money.

________________________

I wasn't expecting such a barrage of posts this late at night so apologies for not responding to everyone who's been kind enough to respond to me.
(I expect more by the time I manage to get this post out, so I hope this answers some of your queries).

With regards to this case there are a hell of a lot of things that have been claimed and counter claimed in this legal case, and as some have alluded to (re the father) there is still so much we don't know. If she was so wealthy why did she flee in the first place?

I apologies for repeating myself but my unease comes from the fact that these two girls who have spent most of their life in Ireland are now going to be and we are sending them away to the unknown. That is a fact.

Regardless of what this woman’s situation was like before she came to this country there is no certainty as to how she will support herself when she arrives in Lagos. She's an adult and she made the choice to relocate to Ireland for whatever reason and now she has to pay the price fine, but her children made no such choice.

Again I make no apology for feeling the way I do, I'm not suggesting we have the resources to solve the problem on a grand scale but we do have the opportunity to inject stability into these 2 children's lives regardless of what crimes her mother has or has not committed. Whatever way you swing it for me it feels like this state is sending way children who have grown up in this country.

Edit:

When I say stability does not = money, just thought that was important to mention.