Izevbakhai Case Restarts...again.

BallLicker

A Supreme Court appeal by the Sligo based Nigerian woman Pamela Izevbekhai against her deportation will not be heard until next year.

Chief Justice John Murray said due to the volume of cases waiting to be heard by the court, it could not be given the priority being sought by lawyers for the State.

The State has brought a motion to have her appeal struck out on the grounds that fraudulent statements were made in her original High Court actions.

Advertisement
The State's motion will now be heard at the same time as the appeal, the court was told.

Ms Izevbekhai told the court today that she had engaged a new firm of solicitors, after her previous solicitors had received a threatening post card telling them to 'back off' her case.

Ms Izevbekhai has been challenging her deportation since 2005 on the grounds that her two daughters' lives are at risk from female genital mutilation.

She says her first born daughter died as a result of the procedure.

However the State claims that a death certificate and medical documents used to support this contention were forgeries.

Ms Izevebekhai says she was unaware that the documents were forged and has since secured new documents from a different doctor in Nigeria to prove the death of her first born daughter

AlekSmart

Has the new,new Legal representation been identified as yet ?

There must now surely be a serious question mark within the Legal Fraternity as to the wisdom of accepting instructions from Ms Izevbekhai.

Or does the Law Library operate to a different set of rules than the rest of the world ?

herya

gambiaman wrote: »

Won't be heard till next year now

Could it be that they moved it for 2010 to prevent her from turning the "don't send the children away in Christmas time" waterworks on?

slimjimmc

herya wrote: »

Could it be that they moved it for 2010 to prevent her from turning the "don't send the children away in Christmas time" waterworks on?

nah, its clearly a cruel and callous tactic to prevent the girls spending Christmas with their father and brother . If they were sent home for Christmas the whole family could be reunited and could celebrate Christmas together instead of being divided across two continents. Why aren't they crying for that I wonder?

HollyB

herya wrote: »

Could it be that they moved it for 2010 to prevent her from turning the "don't send the children away in Christmas time" waterworks on?

Possibly. In terms of PR, deporting the family in December is a guarantee that RAR and their ilk - though they have been very quiet about this case recently - will be out in their droves full of outrage at the thought that Naomi and Jemima should be deprived of their opportunity to celebrate Christmas at a direct provision centre and forced to spend it with their father and (assuming he actually exists) brother instead.

The Budget could also be a factor. How much patience will people have for Pamela's long drawn out and very expensive appeals when they see how their incomes will be cut in order to balance the books?

slimjimmc wrote: »

nah, its clearly a cruel and callous tactic to prevent the girls spending Christmas with their father and brother . If they were sent home for Christmas the whole family could be reunited and could celebrate Christmas together instead of being divided across two continents. Why aren't they crying for that I wonder?

As I understand it, the Irish government wouldn't stop Pamela and her daughters leaving the country if she chose to drop her appeal and leave. They're not the ones keeping the Izevbekhai family from spending Christmas together.

ParkRunner

HollyB wrote: »

As I understand it, the Irish government wouldn't stop Pamela and her daughters leaving the country if she chose to drop her appeal and leave. They're not the ones keeping the Izevbekhai family from spending Christmas together.

A point worth emphasising! She has been obliged to leave the State ever since a deportation order was made against her. It is only that she has chosen not to remove herself from the State that the Government have to get involved and will need to spend yet more money arranging her travel arrangements back to her home country.

slimjimmc

HollyB wrote: »

As I understand it, the Irish government wouldn't stop Pamela and her daughters leaving the country if she chose to drop her appeal and leave. They're not the ones keeping the Izevbekhai family from spending Christmas together.

I know, I was just showing that, regardless of the truth, a spin could be put on the reason for the delay in coming to a final decision... allow them enjoy Christmas in Ireland or prevent them from enjoying it with the rest of the family in Nigeria.

AlekSmart

Now that 2010 is upon us and the new Legal Calendar is ticking,do we have any up to date information on the status of this Case ?

walshb

Pamela deserves a bloody award now. Simply for exposing thses legal eagles for the shams that they are, the justice system for the waste that it is and all those snobby lawyers for thinking they are clever. The whole system, and none of them could end this. Pamela for sheer stamina and enthusiasm deserves to stay now. This must be 20 + times for her in this highest of courts, and still she's here? That says a whole lot more to me about the disgrace and ineptitude of the legal system and its people than it does about Pamela, who is simply determined to remain in this country

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

JonathanAnon

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Jesus H Christ, an illegal immigrant with their own website. I see a few articles on the website indicating backing from FG.. wouldnt be the first time they backed the wrong horse.

Is there any other country in the EU that wouldnt have thrown her out at this stage?

johnnyskeleton

walshb wrote: »

Pamela deserves a bloody award now. Simply for exposing thses legal eagles for the shams that they are, the justice system for the waste that it is and all those snobby lawyers for thinking they are clever. The whole system, and none of them could end this. Pamela for sheer stamina and enthusiasm deserves to stay now. This must be 20 + times for her in this highest of courts, and still she's here? That says a whole lot more to me about the disgrace and ineptitude of the legal system and its people than it does about Pamela, who is simply determined to remain in this country

Why stop there? Surely it's a "disgrace" to the whole of Ireland? Why not the whole of the E.U.?

Honestly, the day that a person pursing their case in the courts is considered a disgrace upon those courts is a day to remember. Summary justice from a gun barrell is the way to go (so long as you are on the right end of the barrell that is).

If you understood anything about the immigration system, you would know that the Courts have no power to remove her, they can at best grant an injunction to keep her here. The responsibility for deporting someone is that of the Minister for Justice. And besides, the High Court determined against her in 2008 and it was the intervention of the ECtHR (i.e. nothing to do with the Irish Courts or legal system) which prevented her from being deported after that.

walshb

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

If you understood anything about the immigration system, you would know that the Courts have no power to remove her, they can at best grant an injunction to keep her here. The responsibility for deporting someone is that of the Minister for Justice. And besides, the High Court determined against her in 2008 and it was the intervention of the ECtHR (i.e. nothing to do with the Irish Courts or legal system) which prevented her from being deported after that.

So, the Justice Ministe removes her? Yes, he does, but after the courts decide on her right to stay or not.
He acts after the courts have determined her validity to remain here. They have decided, time and time again, and still
she remains. Something stinks.

You see no problem with her being able to constantly appeal and appeal and appeal with no end in sight? Something is absolute rotten with the legal system if this is allowed, rotten to the core.

You are right though, it's not just the Irish judicial system and it's legal eagles, it's the whole system in the EU. This woman has exposed the ineptitude big time

donkey balls

we should do what the Aussies do put them through the asylum process if they fail there on the next plane out of the country, the likes of her have brought the whole asylum process into disrepute our system is fair but its the likes of the legal eagles who milk these cases.
in my opinion once a person has gone through the process (which i consider fare) and fails if they take futher action appealing the case the legal fee's should not be paid for by the govt.
lets see how many law firms would take on there cases on human rights grounds:rolleyes:

johnnyskeleton

walshb wrote: »

So, the Justice Ministe removes her? Yes, he does, but after the courts decide on her right to stay or not.

He acts after the courts have determined her validity to remain here. They have decided, time and time again, and still
she remains. Something stinks

The courts decide no such thing. In her particular case, she sought to challenge a deportation order on the basis that she was not given fair procedures in the determination of her subsidiary protection claim (or simiar challenge). However, unless she is granted an injunction by the courts the fact that she has a challenge outstanding does not affect the validity of the deportation order.

I am not aware of any injunction since 2008, although I haven't been following the case too closely. The supreme court are very slow to grant an injunction for an appeal.

walshb wrote: »

You see no problem with her being able to constantly appeal and appeal and appeal with no end in sight?

Where did I say that? Please don't try to make me a straw man, it won't work. The fact that she has been in the Supreme Court a number of times does not mean she is constantly appealing.Most of the last few occasions have been adjournments.

walshb wrote: »

Something is absolute rotten with the legal system if this is allowed, rotten to the core.

Since this is the politics forum as opposed to AH, you need to actually say what is wrong, rather than simply assuming something is wrong. What, in your view, is the error of law or procedure that you are complaining of? I don't think the mere fact that she is still in the country is a valid criticism of the whole Irish justice system and legal profession, and doubt you really think that. So the presence of one failed asylum seeker = disgrace upon country solicitor who does conveyancing and road traffic law.

walshb wrote: »

You are right though, it's not just the Irish judicial system and it's legal eagles, it's the whole system in the EU. This woman has exposed the ineptitude big time

The problem she exposes is not the ineptitude of the whole system in the EU, but rather the dilema faced by all asylum systems - you can either do it quick, or do it fair. We do it quick. While this means that some people will bring judicial review actions with lots of publicity and the intervention of the ECHR, it also means that a lot of other people are denied fair procedures and simply deported (with little or no media attention).

johnnyskeleton

donkey balls wrote: »

we should do what the Aussies do put them through the asylum process if they fail there on the next plane out of the country, the likes of her have brought the whole asylum process into disrepute our system is fair but its the likes of the legal eagles who milk these cases.
in my opinion once a person has gone through the process (which i consider fare) and fails if they take futher action appealing the case the legal fee's should not be paid for by the govt.
lets see how many law firms would take on there cases on human rights grounds:rolleyes:

Legal fees are only paid by the state in successful cases. It's hardly milking it when the case has been unsuccessful to date.

The principle that legal fees are paid to the successful party is a long standing one in our system. If it were not there, it would mean that clear violations of rights would go unpunished as it would be impossible to get lawyers to work in those areas.

In the same way that if there was no criminal legal aid, a lot of people would be banged up unceremoniously even when they are innocent.

donkey balls

johnny i know were your coming from regarding free legal aid for those that cannot afford to get there own legal team,(and i have no problem with that)but how many people have managed to get to the high/supreme court on more than one occasion through free legal aid?
also if they the court declines her appeal and she loses the case will she be liable for her&the states costs?

johnnyskeleton

donkey balls wrote: »

johnny i know were your coming from regarding free legal aid for those that cannot afford to get there own legal team,(and i have no problem with that)but how many people have managed to get to the high/supreme court on more than one occasion through free legal aid?

Many legal aid/AG scheme cases go to the supreme court.

How many appeals to the supreme court has she had? By my reconing, she has had two high court cases which are both currently under appeal to the supreme court and which are yet to be determined. I think people might be misinterpreting appearances in court as being separate appeals.

donkey balls wrote: »

also if they the court declines her appeal and she loses the case will she be liable for her&the states costs?

Of course.

97i9y3941

win win situation,clog up the legal system with rubbish applications,allow the taxpayer to pick up the tab and at the same time stay in the country whilst case been reviewed..

Pot Noodle =

This whole episode is so wrong she has been caught with forged docs twice now In the love of Christ she has to go

AlekSmart

So the presence of one failed asylum seeker = disgrace upon country solicitor who does conveyancing and road traffic law.

At this juncture Ms Izevbekhai has had 3 (AFAIR) seperate Legal Teams appearing for her with perhaps a fourth Solictors firm dating back to the inception of her case.

With Two sets of lawyers coming off record in quick succession at the portals of the Court there is quite obviously something seriously awry with her instructions.

I feel it is somewhat disingenuous to attempt to disparage the "Country Solicitor" in this case as Ms Izevbekhai has to date been very well served by that very body only to have left them in a hugely professionally embarrasing position by her reluctance to tell the truth.

While this means that some people will bring judicial review actions with lots of publicity and the intervention of the ECHR, it also means that a lot of other people are denied fair procedures and simply deported (with little or no media attention).

The current attitude of the ECHR is as yet unknown,however there was some speculation following Ms Izevbekhai`s last burst of obfuscation that the ECHR was preparing to remove Ms Izevbekhai`s case from its active list.

I remain mightly impressed that this State has stood firm against this woman`s case and I further believe that the resolve shown has and will continue to resonate through the ranks of those waiting to "do a Pamela" on it,should she be successful.

If anything the Izevbekhai case has proven to all and sundry that Irelands asylum procedures are as procedurally fair as any other Democratic country.

I would contend that our record of deportations stands up to robust inspection,with each group of deportees being afforded full cogniscence of their Human Rights.

Indeed it`s interesting to note the numbers of criminals appearing in the lists of deportees in recent times,surely a sign that our system is working in the greater public interest.

I also feel that the GNIB and the rank and file Gardai who have dealt with the Izevbekhai case are due a very great vote of thanks for their diligence in unravelling a very professionally constructed scheme indeed.

The contacts they make and the intelligence they have gathered may well stand the country in good stead at some future date

Red_Marauder

How old is her daughter now, nine or ten? It is her daughter/ children who I really feel sorry for here, having their future dragged through the courts and having to ajust to life back in Nigeria and cutting all of their irish links due to what seems to be Izevbekhai's legal games.

johnnyskeleton

AlekSmart wrote: »

I feel it is somewhat disingenuous to attempt to disparage the "Country Solicitor" in this case as Ms Izevbekhai has to date been very well served by that very body only to have left them in a hugely professionally embarrasing position by her reluctance to tell the truth.

Yes, that was my point.

AlekSmart wrote: »

If anything the Izevbekhai case has proven to all and sundry that Irelands asylum procedures are as procedurally fair as any other Democratic country.

One case can't possibly prove the fairness of procedures in the whole state. Denying people oral appeals if they put their asylum claims in late without inquiring as to what their reason was for putting it in late is just one example of this. You may well argue that it shows there is fairness in the courts, but the case isn't about her asylum claim as such, it is about her subsidiary protection claim.

AlekSmart wrote: »

I would contend that our record of deportations stands up to robust inspection,with each group of deportees being afforded full cogniscence of their Human Rights.

I suspect that a lot of the deportees have had nothing but lipservice paid to their human rights.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Indeed it`s interesting to note the numbers of criminals appearing in the lists of deportees in recent times,surely a sign that our system is working in the greater public interest.

Eh? Source? If true, there are a number of conclusions that might be drawn, I'm not sure that it would amount to evidence that our system is working in the greater public interest though.

itsonlywords

Red_Marauder wrote: »

How old is her daughter now, nine or ten? It is her daughter/ children who I really feel sorry for here, having their future dragged through the courts and having to ajust to life back in Nigeria and cutting all of their irish links due to what seems to be Izevbekhai's legal games.

She should have considered her daughters when she tried to scam the Irish nation. It is not for me to feel any guilt. I say she and her supporters should be billed for wasting Irish peoples tax money. Time to get tough and deport he immediately.

AlekSmart

Eh? Source? If true, there are a number of conclusions that might be drawn, I'm not sure that it would amount to evidence that our system is working in the greater public interest though.

My sources,poor as though you will probably regard them,are the news reports of the last batch of deportations which revealed that people of interest to their native law enforcement agencies were featuring on the list of deportees.

Not much I`ll grant you,but enough for me at any rate.

I am quite happy to accept the evidence of an openly operated asylum system such as we have.

I fully agree that it`s NOT perfect,but then large numbers of those who attempt to subvert it are far from prefect either,as Ms Izevbekhai continues to strive to prove.

I`m lucky enough to work with a large ethnically varied group of colleagues,many Nigerian who have been very intertested in the developments as they unfolded.

One of the aspects of the Izevbekhai case which caught my interest from the outset was the regard in which her case was held amongst many of her fellow countrymen ALREADY legally resident here.

I cannot recall any of these people speaking positively in regard to her allegations with even Lads from her own home State rolling their eyes at the ever increasing amount of stuff presented to the Irish Courts.

All anecdotal I freely admit,but I am quite happy to place a greater weight on the opinion of a Native born Nigerian colleague than I am on the opinions of an Irish based Human Rights Campaigner,however well intentioned.

One of the main asects of Ms Izevbekhai`s protestations which rankles with many Nigerians is the extent to which she has attempted to reduce the status of that Country at all costs.

Most of those Nigerians whom I share my breaktime with will readily admit to a very great Problem with Corruption and a lack of standards in public services,however they are now finding,and commenting,on the ability of those negative aspects to cross entire continents and wreak the same havoc here too !!!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

surripere

Rights!! Rights!! Rights!! :rolleyes: What about OUR rights to deport friggin chancers. I'm convinced the judiciary are aliens for they certainly behave as if there from another planet. A pack of elitist, condescending eggheads, talking precious mumbo jumbo, god be with de days of common sense. But this supine government is where the true problem lies, gimme one good man, a King like days of yore.

moonpurple

a former school friend works with a very young disabled relative, has sought legal aid to get clarity and increase peace of mind in the disabled persons day to day, huge backlog caused not least by folks arriving into the country and inundating the free legal aid system, trying hard not to be racist here, but vulnerable irish person in a more difficult position because of robust folks from different parts of the planet signing on to the local systems.... I agree with Minister McDowell's approach..and the yummy mummies of ski loving Dublin kicked him out..

johnnyskeleton

moonpurple wrote: »

a former school friend works with a very young disabled relative, has sought legal aid to get clarity and increase peace of mind in the disabled persons day to day, huge backlog caused not least by folks arriving into the country and inundating the free legal aid system, trying hard not to be racist here, but vulnerable irish person in a more difficult position because of robust folks from different parts of the planet signing on to the local systems.... I agree with Minister McDowell's approach..and the yummy mummies of ski loving Dublin kicked him out..

What exactly do you mean by folks arriving into the country and inundating the free legal aid system?

The woman in this case is not getting legal aid, nor is your friend.

If your problem is that your friend didn't get legal aid, it has nothing to do with immigration or the present case. I seriously doubt you can show that your friend was deprived of legal aid because of foreigners. Take that up with your local representative. Better yet, take it up with your MEP, Kathy Sinnott.

Red_Marauder

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Unfortunately I agree with you; I think it's a terrible situation for what are effectively Irish children, if not by law, but this whole debacle is entirely the mother's fault it would seem.