Izevbakhai Case Restarts...again.

97i9y3941

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

The woman in this case is not getting legal aid

:eek:so is she really paying out of her own pocket? :eek::eek:

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

opo

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

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,

This is true. She is getting legal aid by yet another firm of solicitors that can guarantee their names will be published in every newspaper in the land.

Should she lose (yet again) - they will be liable for their own personal costs. The rest ie the courts times and expenses will be picked up by the mug taxpayer as she cannot afford to pay. In effect - free legal aid and court access.

Meanwhile, the mug taxpayer houses, clothes, feeds and educates the family and keeps his head down in case he/she is called a racist for daring to peep up.

As for those who believe this is a wondeful display of our procedures - it is anything but. It is a wonderful display of the legal profession savaging the quasi judicial processes in order to ingratiate itself into every aspect at maximum cost to the taxpayer. A ten year Izevbakhai tribunal would still not satisfy this lot that her so called bloody "rights" were ever vindicated.

These parasites will be routed out or the government will. The status quo will not be funded by a gormless taxpayer forever.

johnnyskeleton

Fred83 wrote: »

:eek:so is she really paying out of her own pocket? :eek::eek:

No, but there are lawyers who are acting on a no win no fee basis who have taken her case. You might not have sympathy for her in particular, but they have given of their time for no reward to represent her case. They have not been paid by the state to represent her.

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Where to even start. Can the tribune provide vouchers for that figure? I assume they can for the round trip to Nigeria, but can they prove it as legitimate legal costs?

opo wrote: »

This is true. She is getting legal aid by yet another firm of solicitors that can guarantee their names will be published in every newspaper in the land.

Should she lose (yet again) - they will be liable for their own personal costs. The rest ie the courts times and expenses will be picked up by the mug taxpayer as she cannot afford to pay. In effect - free legal aid and court access.

Access to the courts is a fundamental right in democratic states. If you want, you could look at how much it costs to give due process to people charged with criminal offences, and I'm sure it costs a lot more.

opo

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Access to the courts is a fundamental right in democratic states. If you want, you could look at how much it costs to give due process to people charged with criminal offences, and I'm sure it costs a lot more.

A fundamental right does not translate into an excercisable right in real and practical terms. Either way, it is a right established by Citizens and not put there for foreign scam artists to ridicule and abuse - even with the ever willing aid of our so called legal "profession".

AlekSmart

Does anybody here have knowledge of exactly wht Ms Izevbekhai`s representation status now is ?

AFAIAA her last HC appearance featured yet another Legal Team coming off-record at short notice and a curt reference to some unspecified "new" team familiarizing themselves with her somewhat unique representative requirements.

Irrespective of Ms Izevbekhai`s status,her case most assuredly has raised many questions as to the entire procedural state of the Courts System and the role being played by the Legal Proffession itself as opposed to the Leglislature.

Taken together with the Zoe Developments cases in the High Court it could be argued that 2009 represented a VERY bad year for the integrity of the Higher Legal Functions in Ireland,a situation which looks set to be even more underlined by the raft of home repossessions now being put in train.

It will indeed be interesting to see if the Courts in general will extend the same munificence to "Ordinary" folks who face ruin as they have to Ms Izevbekhai and her supporters ?? :rolleyes:

walshb

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

No, but there are lawyers who are acting on a no win no fee basis who have taken her case. You might not have sympathy for her in particular, but they have given of their time for no reward to represent her case. They have not been paid by the state to represent her.
.

Why do you think they are giving their time for "free" (no win no fee basis) here?

I think the only thing more ludicrous than Pamela's evidence and claim is that
the lawyers representing her are doing it for anything but fame and money and ego.

This woman has cost someone a heap of money. I don't know the minutia concerning it all, but there is no way that this woman is paying her way. Someone is footing this lengthy legal sham.

HollyB

walshb wrote: »

This woman has cost someone a heap of money. I don't know the minutia concerning it all, but there is no way that this woman is paying her way. Someone is footing this lengthy legal sham.

The taxpayers of Ireland. Even if she's managed to find a legal team who will work for nothing, the State isn't as fortunate. We have to pay for the State's legal costs, not to mention the costs of accommodating the family. I doubt that there is any chance that even a fraction of these costs will be recouped, despite Pamela's claims that the family are wealthy.

blackiebest

HollyB wrote: »

The taxpayers of Ireland. Even if she's managed to find a legal team who will work for nothing, the State isn't as fortunate. We have to pay for the State's legal costs, not to mention the costs of accommodating the family. I doubt that there is any chance that even a fraction of these costs will be recouped, despite Pamela's claims that the family are wealthy.

You KNOW they will not be recouped, neither will the costs of spouses of PS workers flying around the world, business class, at our expense or the fas millions flittered away etc. This is a screwed up country, with a screwed up population who allow ourselves to be shafted at every corner. Sure this case has gone on long enough, Pamela should have been sent home when the fraud was uncovered. However on the scale of what is going on with taxpayers money she is not even in the ballpark.

When eventually this farce is over I hope the passion displayed against this woman and her kids is refocused on the real fraudsters and shisters that run our banks, civil service, unions, government, judicary etc.

18 months ago I stated that I would be ashamed to be Irish if this woman and her kids were deported, I was wrong. She should be deported, and if justice was served sitting alongside her should be all those f**kers who milk the gullible 'Joe Soap' to satisfy their greed and thats most elected and non elected public servants in the country.

Rant over:o

opo

blackiebest wrote: »

You KNOW they will not be recouped, neither will the costs of spouses of PS workers flying around the world, business class, at our expense or the fas millions flittered away etc. This is a screwed up country, with a screwed up population who allow ourselves to be shafted at every corner. Sure this case has gone on long enough, Pamela should have been sent home when the fraud was uncovered. However on the scale of what is going on with taxpayers money she is not even in the ballpark.

I think if you focused on individuals alone in the other areas mentioned, you might also suggest that they are not in the ballpark.

The point for me remains that PI is one of thousands that have been entertained for far too long and at massive expense cumulatively.

I diverge from your stance in the sense that I do not think we need to solve every other problem before facing into this one of assisted fraud that needs to be addressed urgently and decisively - solely on its own merits.

walrusgumble

EF wrote: »

Are you for real? Members of the RAT are required to have had not less than five years experience as a practising barrister or practising solicitor before appointment. I dont think anyone here is defending James Nicholson. Bias was found to be an issue in his case and he resigned. His cases were/are also being reviewed and I have never heard of a court settlement being made public without the consent of both parties..have you? They are by their nature private agreements between the parties involved!

The trouble with Pamela is that she has not been able to prove one single part of her claim! She admitted herself that the death certificate was a forgery so why did she need to do this? Until a few months ago her case was proceeding on the basis that she was entirely credible regarding her claim that she lost her infant daughter to FGM, but even still if it were true and this is the crucial bit, she does not come within the definition of a refugee or a person in need of subsidiary protection, even putting all the lies aside.

mr micra is referring to experience and practice in refugee law/human rights law

blackiebest

opo wrote: »

I think if you focused on individuals alone in the other areas mentioned, you might also suggest that they are not in the ballpark.

The point for me remains that PI is one of thousands that have been entertained for far too long and at massive expense cumulatively.

I diverge from your stance in the sense that I do not think we need to solve every other problem before facing into this one of assisted fraud that needs to be addressed urgently and decisively - solely on its own merits.

I totally agree with you, however because of our inept and corrupt systems we do not deal with anything urgently and almost never decisively. As the months roll on more and more of the vital services we require as a nation are being exposed as being run and administered by a bunch of back scratchers who show distain for the population in general, while we, the public, just seem to raise our arses a little higher to facilitate our collective rape!

simonj

Just looked at the Turbine today - with the cost to the tax payer, would it not be cheaper just to let her stay!
By the time this is over the kids will be through Uni

HollyB

simonj wrote: »

Just looked at the Turbine today - with the cost to the tax payer, would it not be cheaper just to let her stay!
By the time this is over the kids will be through Uni

As asylum seekers, they're not eligible to attend third level - and I doubt that even Pamela's most determined supporters think that they can drag out the case until Naomi's Leaving Cert year in order to point to the Kunle case as a precedent.

Zambia

Oh look she is still in Ireland...:(

Every now and again I drop in on these threads in the hope she has done the decent thing and left of her own accord or someone in the Public service has come up with a solution.

Guess its a few years now and I must be kidding myself.

simonj

HollyB wrote: »

As asylum seekers, they're not eligible to attend third level - and I doubt that even Pamela's most determined supporters think that they can drag out the case until Naomi's Leaving Cert year in order to point to the Kunle case as a precedent.

Well, they have had a pretty good crack at it already

itsonlywords

District_9 wrote: »

Oh look she is still in Ireland...:(

Every now and again I drop in on these threads in the hope she has done the decent thing and left of her own accord or someone in the Public service has come up with a solution.

Guess its a few years now and I must be kidding myself.

As long as we have a shower of idiots who are actively encouraging her and who support her in her quest to use our costly resources to stall the process , she will remain. What we need is good strong policies on illegal immigrants. Give them 24 hours and boot em out. Australia has that policy and it is works.

Ally Dick

No doubt Michael D Higgins and Senator Norris are sticking up for her !

Zambia

itsonlywords wrote: »

Give them 24 hours and boot em out. Australia has that policy and it is works.

I live in Australia and that is not the case. At all.

Buford T Justice

I've just checked the website letthemstay.org

They have still not said anything on this site since the May announcment last year when the forgeries initially came about where they pledged there undying allegiance to her. I wonder what they have to say in light of the recent developments and the legal teams coming off record?

When is this before the courts again does anyone know?

IrishManSaipan

Fingers McGee wrote: »

When is this before the courts again does anyone know?

Her case is up for review on Thursday.

itsonlywords

District_9 wrote: »

I live in Australia and that is not the case. At all.

Anybody not complying with immigration policy is booted out immediately, on the next available flight. Asylum seekers are treated differently where they are removed to a secure holding camps like on Christmas Island and processed expeditiously. Not allowed to roam the streets like the lot here who can go about their daily business and buy 95, 96, 97, cars and all on 19 Euro per week. Make them Minister of Finance when they can live on 19 Euro and pay tax and insurance on cars and have bank accounts.

itsonlywords

IrishManSaipan wrote: »

Her case is up for review on Thursday.

Well lets hope that this is final. Will we be given the opportunity to wave her off at the airport. I would go and smile.

Buford T Justice

itsonlywords wrote: »

Anybody not complying with immigration policy is booted out immediately, on the next available flight. Asylum seekers are treated differently where they are removed to a secure holding camps like on Christmas Island and processed expeditiously. Not allowed to roam the streets like the lot here who can go about their daily business and buy 95, 96, 97, cars and all on 19 Euro per week. Make them Minister of Finance when they can live on 19 Euro and pay tax and insurance on cars and have bank accounts.

I've heard of cases where they are getting cars bought for them or taxis for them here and there because they are claiming that they are discriminated against on public transport.

itsonlywords wrote: »

Well lets hope that this is final. Will we be given the opportunity to wave her off at the airport. I would go and smile.

That, or lets see what else can be pulled out of the bag to delay this further

IrishManSaipan

itsonlywords wrote: »

Well lets hope that this is final. Will we be given the opportunity to wave her off at the airport. I would go and smile.

I think its only up for mention..... the real deal is months away yet.

Zambia

itsonlywords wrote: »

Anybody not complying with immigration policy is booted out immediately, on the next available flight.
Asylum seekers are treated differently where they are removed to a secure holding camps like on Christmas Island and processed expeditiously. Not allowed to roam the streets like the lot here who can go about their daily business and buy 95, 96, 97, cars and all on 19 Euro per week. Make them Minister of Finance when they can live on 19 Euro and pay tax and insurance on cars and have bank accounts.

Yes Asylum Seekers are not allowed free into the populace, the goverment here does go to great efforts to stop them even entering Australian Waters. But they do not turn them around on landing if they are claiming Asylum. This does not really happen as your visa to Australia is checked prior to you boarding a flight to Australia.

Dont get me wrong the process is good. But by no means fool proof we hear of cases every day where it fails.

Red_Marauder

Fingers McGee wrote: »

I've heard of cases where they are getting cars bought for them

and haircuts as well by any chance?

AlekSmart

I've heard of cases where they are getting cars bought for them or taxis for them here and there because they are claiming that they are discriminated against on public transport

.

This is a hoary ol`chesnut that surfaces again and again wherever Guinness is sold in Ireland.

I have met literally hundreds of people that knew a lad who`s nephews great uncle had an "Asylum Seeker" turn up with a DSFA cheque to buy his `96 Astra........

However I personally have never had the opportunity to put my finger in that particular wound.

However...one scenario from which this story COULD have developed is the incidences of supposed "Language Difficulties" between Asylum Seekers and Bus Drivers operating services between Asylum Seekers accomodation centres and adjacent population/commercicl centres.

Although the "Total Provision" principle does extend to the hiring of coaches to bring asylum seekers shopping and on recreational outings,it seems that some (many) individuals felt that they were recieving a raw deal from the Public Transport services due to their Language deficiencies.

It`s my understanding (Unconfirmed) that in some cases the DSFA officers attached to some units authorised,as they are entitled to, the granting of DSFA Free Travel Scheme passes to Individual Asylum Seekers.

This,coupled with a well developed native sense of begrudgery,may well have led on to the Cheques for Cars story.

However thats a topic for another day,and has little to do with Ms Izevbekhai`s ongoing marathon "Battle" (as some portray it) against an uncaring Irish State.

Buford T Justice

Case Adjourned again for another three weeks.

Link

A challenge by the Sligo-based Nigerian woman Pamela Izevbekhai to her deportation has been adjourned again after the Supreme Court raised new legal questions about her appeal.
The court has asked both sides in the case for submissions on whether or not she was entitled to take a case under legislation which was brought into effect after her deportation order was signed.
The move will mean a further delay in a decision on Ms Isevbekhai's five-year battle against deportation.
Advertisement

The State is challenging her appeal on the grounds that fraudulent documents were used in her High Court case.
Lawyers for the State told the Supreme Court this morning that Ms Isevbekhai had now accepted that a second set of documents were not genuine but were obtained in good faith.
Ms Izevbekhai claims her first-born daughter died as a result of female genital mutilation and her other daughters would be at risk if returned to Nigeria.
Chief Justice John Murray said there was 'almost a jurisdictional' issue to be argued, referring to a regulation which came into effect in October 2006.
Ms Izevbekhai's deportation order pre-dates the regulation. The case was adjourned for three weeks to allow both sides to prepare submissions.

Seriously, how much longer is this going to go on for. I don't understand why the appeal wasn't dismissed yesterday

Isevbekhai had now accepted that a second set of documents were not genuine but were obtained in good faith.

Is it just me, or is this article reading like she thinks its ok, because she got them in good faith?
Seriously, how much longer is this going to go on for. I don't understand why the case hasn't been dismissed at this stage.

AlekSmart

When the modern history of the Irish Higher Courts comes to be written certain judgements,phrases and methodologies will be seen as worthy of note.

I would suggest that the ZOE Developments case and the Izevbekhai case will occupy the front rows in terms of setting new precedence.

Chief Justice John Murray said there was 'almost a jurisdictional' issue to be argued, referring to a regulation which came into effect in October 2006.

When a Chief Justice uses phraseology as bolded above then we,the people,need to get tuned-in to the nuances......what exactly does "almost" mean.....?