Horrendous!! 4 yr old boy taken from his mum at dublin airport and mum deported

HollyB

seamus wrote: »

I'm pretty sure if the HSE told the mother that the child was going to be handed to state authorities in Nigeria, she'd have no problem coming out and claiming her lost property :rolleyes:
We need to not play the fluffy cards on this one. Find an appropriate authority in Nigeria, hand the child over and forget about it.

Like it or not, this woman has effectively made her child the responsibility of the HSE and, as such, they have a duty of care to the child so it can't be as simple as handing him over to a Nigerian orphanage or child services and forgetting about him. They'd have to be satisfied that he will be safe and cared for if he is turned over to the care of the Nigerian authorities, which will take time to establish.

Riskymove

HollyB wrote: »

They'd have to be satisfied that he will be safe and cared for if he is turned over to the care of the Nigerian authorities, which will take time to establish.

indeed.....as oppossed to the mother :pac:

NothingMan

Riskymove wrote: »

indeed.....as oppossed to the mother :pac:

The Mother applied for refuge here and was refused, appealed and failed. I assume her conditions back home were considered during this process. If she felt that her child was better off here and fiddled the system so at least the child stayed, i'd almost say fair play to her. But it sounds like she was trying to use her child for her own means, not give it a better life.

Raiser

The Orb wrote: »

Ironically yours is the most glib throw away comment of the lot, and you also fail to offer anything to the debate..
This woman, on deportation opted not to take the child with her and has refused all subsequent requests to take the child into her custody...the State was right...no more soft touch

Surely that is just your opinion and I doubt its shared by many fair and open minded People......


Has anyone considered the distinct possibility that in a case where a Parent leaves the Child behind they may well have felt that their Child was actually safer, more secure, better fed and cared for with the HSE than on the Streets of some Nigerian City / at the hands of an abusive other Parent / at the hands of local Criminal Thugs/Militia/Drug Dealers/Pushers/Pimps?

- Loving the confident answers here; All put forward in reply to parts of the question.......

HollyB

NothingMan wrote: »

The Mother applied for refuge here and was refused, appealed and failed. I assume her conditions back home were considered during this process. If she felt that her child was better off here and fiddled the system so at least the child stayed, i'd almost say fair play to her. But it sounds like she was trying to use her child for her own means, not give it a better life.

If you mean her conditions financially speaking, I don't think that that is factored into the equation for an asylum claim unless it relates to the reason why she is allegedly being persecuted. I don't think that being poor is grounds for asylum.

NothingMan

HollyB wrote: »

If you mean her conditions financially speaking, I don't think that that is factored into the equation for an asylum claim unless it relates to the reason why she is allegedly being persecuted. I don't think that being poor is grounds for asylum.

Definitely not, I meant I assumed they felt she was physically safe to return home ie. no political persecution etc...

If she's poor then too bad, let your own countries welfare look after you. Although I assume she won't be getting €200 a week, a house and expenses in Nigeria.

HollyB

NothingMan wrote: »

Definitely not, I meant I assumed they felt she was physically safe to return home ie. no political persecution etc...

I'd say so. If they believed her to be at genuine risk of political persecution, she and her son would have been granted asylum, and deportation wouldn't be an issue.

opo

Raiser wrote: »

Surely that is just your opinion and I doubt its shared by many fair and open minded People......


Has anyone considered the distinct possibility that in a case where a Parent leaves the Child behind they may well have felt that their Child was actually safer, more secure, better fed and cared for with the HSE than on the Streets of some Nigerian City / at the hands of an abusive other Parent / at the hands of local Criminal Thugs/Militia/Drug Dealers/Pushers/Pimps?

- Loving the confident answers here; All put forward in reply to parts of the question.......

Not all Nigerians are Criminal Thugs/Militia/Drug Dealers/Pushers/Pimps, child abusers etc. Although, I would not rule out their presence in the midst of well got, globe trotting "asylum seekers".

Zambia

Raiser wrote: »

In Bureaucracy we trust.

Have you an alternative?

AlekSmart

Has anyone considered the distinct possibility that in a case where a Parent leaves the Child behind they may well have felt that their Child was actually safer, more secure, better fed and cared for with the HSE than on the Streets of some Nigerian City / at the hands of an abusive other Parent / at the hands of local Criminal Thugs/Militia/Drug Dealers/Pushers/Pimps?

I have indeed considered that possibility but I choose to disregard it in the light of what I see each and every day in downtown Dublin City as infants are dragged around the streets by their native Irish parents as they go about the more inportant business of sourcing their narcotic or alocholic sustenance.

Such is the regard for childern exhibited by our native youthful parents that they have no problem in displaying it for the TV cameras as evidenced by the RTE Prime Time Investigates programme.

Just about the only one of Raisers list of Nigerian Nasties we dont possess is the "Militia" and that may not be too long in coming at current rates of social disintegration.

One other aspect of this case which deserves mention,and reflects well on the Garda National Bureau of Immigration is the extent to which the Member concerned attempted to facilitate this "Parent" in reuniting with Their child...!

walshb

Seriously, when is this country going to grow a pair of balls when it comes to the abuses and scams being perpetrated by illegal immigrants?

Part of the problem is the Irish people too. We go by the book, allow the due process, and some more, and still we have Irish people criticising and disagreeing with the authorities

HollyB

walshb wrote: »

Part of the problem is the Irish people too. We go by the book, allow the due process, and some more, and still we have Irish people criticising and disagreeing with the authorities

Look at this case. Due process was followed, and this mother and son were found not to qualify for asylum. The mother appealed, was refused, and then evaded a deportation order for years, refusing to cooperate when she was eventually found, and the State's being criticized.

If the child had been deported with his mother, there'd be complaining about that.

Rev. BlueJeans

Proper order that these people are being booted for the opportunistic chancers they are.

The fact that this "parent" refused to take their own child into their care, as would be the natural maternal instinct of any mother, speaks volumes for their mindset. The child, as said, is an innocent in all this. They are also however, not entitled to citizenship, and should be turned over to the Nigerian authorities, using whatever precedents and protocols are in place, to ensure their safety and wellbeing, two little concerns their mother didn't show.

Our authorities, for their part, have done nothing wrong here-and the kind of senseless hand wringing that the original post exemplifies is a major part of the reason that this kind of exodus was allowed in the first place.

On another note, I wonder where Daddy was? :rolleyes:

walshb

HollyB wrote: »

Look at this case. Due process was followed, and this mother and son were found not to qualify for asylum. The mother appealed, was refused, and then evaded a deportation order for years, refusing to cooperate when she was eventually found, and the State's being criticized.

If the child had been deported with his mother, there'd be complaining about that.

Holly, I think we are in agreement here. My point is that when we do allow due process and all that, and appeals and the person is denied, still we have persons here in Ireland wanting more for these failed asylum seekers. It is these people who are causing the problem,
not the failed asylum seekers. The legal eagles and the sham bodies set up to fight on and on and on for these failed seekers

The let them stay brigade, no matter what the issue or circumstance.

And, usually, it's let them stay, but don't put them in my neighbourhood

HollyB

walshb wrote: »

Holly, I think we are in agreement here. My point is that when we do allow due process and all that, and appeals and the person is denied, still we have persons here in Ireland wanting more for these failed asylum seekers. It is these people who are causing the problem,
not the failed asylum seekers. The legal eagles and the sham bodies set up to fight on and on and on for these failed seekers

The let them stay brigade, no matter what the issue or circumstance.

And, usually, it's let them stay, but don't put them in my neighbourhood

Did you read the demands - yes, they actually referred to them as demands - of the Cork Anti Racist Movement?

We demand,
1. The right to work.
2. The right to education.
3. The closure of all Direct Provision centres.
4. No deportations.

By that logic, somebody who applies for asylum in Ireland should be automatically granted permanent residence; no point bothering with due process, since they're going to be allowed to stay regardless of whether or not they actually qualify for it. They should be given third-level education funded by the taxpayers of Ireland, permission to work without having to apply for a work permit like those who go through legal channels to come to Ireland. Since they want Direct Provision centres closed, presumably they expect houses and apartments to be provided for any asylum seeker who shows up, along with financial support until/if they get a job and support themselves.

I'd say that most people have no problem with genuine asylum seekers but the idea that failed asylum seekers shouldn't be deported makes a mockery of the system.

walshb

HollyB wrote: »

Did you read the demands - yes, they actually referred to them as demands - of the Cork Anti Racist Movement?



By that logic, somebody who applies for asylum in Ireland should be automatically granted permanent residence; no point bothering with due process, since they're going to be allowed to stay regardless of whether or not they actually qualify for it. They should be given third-level education funded by the taxpayers of Ireland, permission to work without having to apply for a work permit like those who go through legal channels to come to Ireland. Since they want Direct Provision centres closed, presumably they expect houses and apartments to be provided for any asylum seeker who shows up, along with financial support until/if they get a job and support themselves.

I'd say that most people have no problem with genuine asylum seekers but the idea that failed asylum seekers shouldn't be deported makes a mockery of the system.

What hope has the country got when you have these ego trippers trying to scupper every decision the State makes. Like I said, it is not the asylum seekers, it's us who are the problem.

AlekSmart

Look at this case. Due process was followed, and this mother and son were found not to qualify for asylum. The mother appealed, was refused, and then evaded a deportation order for years, refusing to cooperate when she was eventually found, and the State's being criticized.

Look at this case indeed.....not very different from that other ongoing Nigerian cause-célebre Ms Pamela Izevbekhai.

The basic elements are so alike.

Mother and Children fleeing persecution.
No sign of Father.
All elements of Due Process followed scrupulously by the State
All appeals entered and fully engaged with and in turn fail the most basic of consideration.
Subject then absconds .
Campaign then initiated on a broad front,very little of which is of direct relevance to the issue at hand.

One could well ask if these two individuals shared the same immigration advide professional back in Nigeria ?

Papad

AlekSmart wrote: »

One could well ask if these two individuals shared the same immigration advide professional back in Nigeria ?

Well, it is a known fact that there is a document in Nigeria that they use as a template to get into Ireland. However, I think a great deal of the advice they get comes from Irish people.

walrusgumble

Raiser wrote: »

Thankfully we don't have a long and varied history of many Millions emigrating from this Country.

Thankfully we have a sense of decency and compassion.

Thankfully we embrace bureaucracy and all its totalitarian nonsenses.

Thankfully we recognise that the Law is an excellent guide to what is right and wrong.

Thankfully Children that the Irish State has institutionalised are usually protected from slave labour/paedophilia/physical abuse etc.

Thankfully the Mother in this case may have been treated compassionately, may have had access to a translator and may have had her rights/all possible consequences explained sufficiently.

Thankfully we don't have a long history of mismanaging immigration/refugee requests in this Country.

Thankfully all of YOU People consider yourselves to be so very well-informed that you can comment so glibly and sit in Judgement voicing what I suspect are for the most part ignorant throwaway, knee-jerk judgements on this case.........

right, well you make fair points, i get what you are saying, but

1. A very large percentage of people voted to change the laws in Ireland in 2004, with regard to citizenship. People power?

2. It is highley likely that this mother had from 1-2 1/2 years legal advice, which WOULD include legal aid (fair enough) and interpreters when speaking to their lawyer. The mother would also have full (and for some parts free) access to legal representation and tribunal/courts during her time in Ireland. She would it have been made crystal clear by her lawyers, gardai, agent who brought her here, that in the event that she was not successful in her applications, she would be deported. She would have also known full well what the gardai were coming to do. Moreover, it is highely likely that she was requested to sign on at the local immigration office on a regular basis to ensure the authorities knew where she was. So long as she did that, she would be allowed to stay freely until her case, be it asylum, high court judicial review of refusal, application for ltr and sp, high court judical review of refusal and possible injunction application.

3. If she was a mother of an Irish citizen, I note someone did say she was not, but for this point i will say this. If she was a mother of an Irish citizen (therefore, she would have being in Ireland prior to 2005!!! or the father, when the laws came in, meet requirements for the child to be entitled to it - unlikely by sounds of the facts) even if she lost her asylum claim she was able to make an application on basis of child. Despite the ruling of the supreme court in 2003 and despite of the change in the laws in 2004, the Minister did not turf these people out, despite being in limbo! they minsiter invited these parents to make a one off application for residence on basis of irish children on 2005. all they had to do was show that they were part of the child's lif and had lived in the country ever since arrival. Majority of those who made the application got residency. even those who were refused, may have gone to court and succeed and eventually be allowed to stay. they were asked to renew in 2007 and will be asked again next year. all they have to do is prove that they are living in the country and still are part of child's life and remain crime free. that is hardly unfair? is it?

So assuming she is the mother of a citizen child. it would be almost near impossible not to see how she did not get status. so, why she being removed? anything to do with actually failing to remain in ireland?

4. Whilst Nigeria is NOT a place any of us would wish to live in, be it certain human rights violations - lack of effective efforts to stop same, Nigeria is NOT the big monster country many of these people make it out to be. See US Dept of State Human Rights Reports, Freedom House, UK Home Office (i.e when considered strictly in relation to the particular claims made by an applicant). There are many credibility issues and lies being made by citizens of their own country, how honourable is that? (I say this after speaking to many nationals from countries such as Nigeria who say there is no persecution - with exception of FGM)

5. She would have known full well from other Nigerians that the chances of refugee status for Nigerians was slim.She put her own baby and herself at more of a risk by coming to Ireland, living on €19 plus a couple more for her child, crap and inhabitable accommodation (or if private - screwed by the landlord) and with near to no chance of getting work (before recession, even if illegal)

6. It is not just Irish laws that are harsh, though far less in some aspects than ECtHR and English Courts. Refugee Law as you will be aware, is offered to limited circumstances and one must follow certain criteria. It provides that State protection need not be perfect so long as there are avenues to make complaints and be able to seek protection

7. This matter is in relation to immigration/deportation, priest related matters are irrelevant here, so too are Irish politicans schenagans. This is not a knee jerk reaction. Very few right minded Irish people have any objections to people seeking asylum, regardless of nationality where they come from war thorn hell holes like Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq. At least their claims will have potential of credibility. This has being an on going matter for over 10 years. Alot of money have being spent on frivolous claims! THis week, 37 people were deported at the expense of 1/4 of a million euro!

i am happy to discuss this further, in a calm and civilised manner and in private if you wish. but i think, to be honest, some of the knee jerking is coming from you, not in light of your response to inaccuracies and lack of sympathy from others, but from some of your comments are full of inaccuracies and ill informed views you pointed out

kind regards

walrusgumble

Raiser wrote: »

Surely that is just your opinion and I doubt its shared by many fair and open minded People......


Has anyone considered the distinct possibility that in a case where a Parent leaves the Child behind they may well have felt that their Child was actually safer, more secure, better fed and cared for with the HSE than on the Streets of some Nigerian City / at the hands of an abusive other Parent / at the hands of local Criminal Thugs/Militia/Drug Dealers/Pushers/Pimps?

- Loving the confident answers here; All put forward in reply to parts of the question.......

you are right, Nigeria has many elements of what you mentioned, but most countries have those problems (though Nigeria can be scary). I assume though that you have read or are aware of what various country of origin reports provide. I also assume then that you are aware that, surprise surpise, there are numberous Non Governmental Organisations in Nigeria in place to protect people of horrendous problems such as rape, fgm, drugs etc. Please provide evidence of the contrary, or stop actually defaming another country! You are correct in some points, and no doubt you may have a good / excellent idea of problems in Africa as a whole, but please stop trying to make out that all places in Nigeria are complete no go areas!

Asylum law is not available for economic migrants - you know this. you have to provide a credible and plausible well founded fear that you have and will suffer persecution on basis of either religion, nationality, political or membership of a particular social group and that your country is unwilling or unable to protect you. this lady was either found to be not credible or maybe she was credible but could not show that she would suffer persecution if returned for reasons such as the available of adequate protection or there being no actual insourmountable/unreasonable obstacles in moving to another part of nigeria.

She did not meet the criteria, a criteria which meets the geneva convention and eu minium standards. of course, though, how they are treated in ireland is another matter. but they have access to the full arm of the law to seek redress without any intimidation in doing so (bar money)

I understand completely the desperation of trying to chance their arms and get in to the country and run the risk of becoming illegal or deported. but when it was clear that they would have little chance of staying, the mother put herself and child in huge danger. whilst, no doubt her agent would not have told her that the rules had change prior to leaving Nigeria (he was more interested in the dollar signs) she could have left voluntarily once it was found that she had no chance of succeeding.she did not and sadly, for the child, she paid the price

on another note, she had no problems putting her life and her childs life at risk by handing over thousands (and probaly owes someone that money) to the criminals who brought her here and who probably did not know where she was being taken