Izevbekhai and pleading the belly in Irish Law

AlekSmart

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mayor-hails-mums-fight-for-daughters-1564544.html

John-Joe,this is the closest reference I could dig out.....any good to you ?

juleserino

AlekSmart wrote: »

The last opinion delivered by the Chief Justice was particularly unusual in that,to a layperson such as I,it appeared to suggest that the Chief Justice was all-at-sea as to whether his court had any role to play at all in the proceedings ?

"Pleading the belly" sure does have a harsh ring to it. The underlying concept highlights a harsh reality. I guess it is no wonder the judiciary is all at sea with this one. They took her at her word. Who could possibly live with the responsibility of sending a child back home to what the judiciary were led to believe was their fate. Perhaps a reluctance to do so has them in the pickle they are in. Always wondered why the Dept. of Justice were so keen to deport them, whilst the judiciary remained reluctant to do so.

jmcc

AlekSmart wrote: »

The last opinion delivered by the Chief Justice was particularly unusual in that,to a layperson such as I,it appeared to suggest that the Chief Justice was all-at-sea as to whether his court had any role to play at all in the proceedings ?

From what I remember, he was questioning whether the case should be considered as the legislation being relied upon by Izevbekhai's legal team was enacted after the original deportation order was signed. It was the legalistic equivalent of dropping a nuke. This is why he requested arguments from both sides.

I'm not a lawyer and I don't play one on TV.

Regards...jmcc

bonzos

john-joe wrote: »

have you got a link to the above story?

Google it!The people in the NW are sick of this circus....

Pot Noodle =

bonzos wrote: »

Google it!The people in the NW are sick of this circus....

Then why are some of them supporting it then

AlekSmart

Then why are some of them supporting it then

Very true,although Ms Izevbekhai`s support base has dwindled alarmingly since her very thorough exposure as being somewhat more of a total fraud than a genuine case for asylum.

Once again it has to be pointed out that Pamela Izevbekhai has done more to harm the cause of genuine asylum seekers than any right-wing anti immigration lobby ever could.

ilovelamp2000

Sleepy wrote: »

Who pays for the barristers in asylum cases or need I even ask?

If you take a look through the High Court list you'll find that only a small proportion of judicial review cases are legally aided.

A lot of them are either financed by the litigant, or taken on a no foal no fee basis, sometimes by the solicitor, but often by the barristers. If they win the costs are paid by the state.

AlekSmart

Sleepy`s post does raise some pertinent questions re the funding of the Izevbekhai case.

In the earlier stages there appeared to be quite a well of public financial support and equally of Legal Teams perpared to act for her on favourable terms.

However of late we have seen at least two legal teams remove themselves from the case at short notice followed by the most recent appearance of Nigerian Legal Representatives to act for her.

The issue may not be so much who is paying for her representation as how much it is costing us (Taxpayers) to defend the State against unfounded and largely vexatious charges ?

bonzos

Pot wrote:

Then why are some of them supporting it then

No matter how big of a crook you are in the country some people will still support you...just look at Bertie,Ray Burke,John O Donoghue,The Flynns,CJH.Dont confuse support the reality of this scam:rolleyes:

Vinegar Hill

The Supreme Court is due to make a key ruling today on Nigerian woman Pamela Izevbekhai’s fight to stay in Ireland.

The court is to decide whether Pamela Izevbekhai is in a position to further appeal the decision by the minister for justice to deport her.

http://oceanfm.ie/news/2010/07/09/pamela-izevbekhai-back-before-supreme-court-3/

Maybe she will be sent off now.

Buford T Justice

Maybe, but I doubt it.

This is just the latest in a large bunch of straws that she is clutching at. Daughter is at risk of FGM, as her first daughter died of it. Oh, wait! the death cert is forged and the doc says it never happened. Hang on, he's an impostor and she really did exist. I'll get the genuine documents.... ummm...ummm oh. well..... never mind that now, won't someone please think of the children!

They can't be deported now because they've settled now and it would be unfair..

Oh wait, lets try to argue the case now based on new regulations that have been introduced after we sought asylum..(All the while thinking of the next reason for seeking asylum after this one inevitably fails)



I also notice that letthemstay has now been removed.......

Vinegar Hill

The Supreme Court has dismissed an attempt by a Nigerian woman to appeal her deportation.

Her lawyers said afterwards that Ms Izevbekhai would know examine all the options left open to her including a possible a appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0709/izevbekhaip.html

Anyone think it is over yet?

snubbleste

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

Anyone think it is over yet?

No.

mikemac

Who is paying for her lawyers?
And if it is the Irish State, then why is Ireland paying for lawyers for a European Court?

Buford T Justice

Vinegar Hill wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0709/izevbekhaip.html

Anyone think it is over yet?

Not a chance. I'm sure there are plenty more straws she can clutch at yet.

JonathanAnon

Matthew Izani, her latest solicitor was just on the RTE news.. says he expects that she will be allowed to stay in the country while she waits for some other human rights appeal.... I am soooooooo sick of this case.. I wonder is there a counter on how much this chancer is causing the state... hiding behind her kids like the coward she is.

There really isnt any point in having an immigration control system if you are prepared to overlook people attempting to fabricate legal documentation. As soon as they found out she had... she should have been turfed out right away.

Zambia

This case just saddens me.

Is there no way someone will put an end to this

AlekSmart

What I found interesting was the appearance of the two children alongside Pamela in the RTE News clip of her emerging from the Four Courts.

I maybe wrong here,but I cannot recall seeing the Izevbekhai family unit being put forward as an image up to today.

Matthew Izani, her latest solicitor was just on the RTE news.. says he expects that she will be allowed to stay in the country while she waits for some other human rights appeal.

Mr Izani is arriving quite late into this process is he not ?

I also seem to recall the ECHR kicking for touch in their last deliberation of Ms Izevbekhai`s issues.
Did they not decide to await the final outcome of the Supreme Court`s deliberations before deciding if they had a role to play ?

If the State and it`s agencies remain committed to their own principles here it may yet strike a blow for our ability to provide meaningful asylum protection to the many genuine cases who plead for it.

jmcc

AlekSmart wrote: »

What I found interesting was the appearance of the two children alongside Pamela in the RTE News clip of her emerging from the Four Courts.

I maybe wrong here,but I cannot recall seeing the Izevbekhai family unit being put forward as an image up to today.

It was also way down the list of items on the Nine O'Clock news on RTE. It seems that the media are sticking with facts of the case now. Apparently she did not attend court today so RTE and others had to use file footage.

Regards...jmcc

donkey balls

whats the chances of the ECHR backing her up? even though it has been proved that she submitted forged docs to the high court here.

D-Generate

What was her first entry point after leaving Nigeria? I thought legally that the first country an asylum seeker enters has to be where they make their application?

Its a hugely interesting case for a number of reasons and the main one to me is who is funding the case. I know that taxpayers are shouldering some of the cost of her legal team but surely there are other donations being made by groups who have a vested interest in Irelands and by extension the EU's immigration and asylum policy.

Buford T Justice

jmcc wrote: »

Apparently she did not attend court today so RTE and others had to use file footage.

Regards...jmcc

It begs the question as to why she would not be in attendance in court when a decision of such magnitude is being made.

From the indo

Important points:
Ms Izevbekhai, who claims her daughters Naomi (9) and Jemima (8) face genital mutilation if they are deported to her native Nigeria, is "looking forward" to having her case heard before the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Wow, what a surprise. I never could have seen this one coming. Lets surmise here. Lost battle against deportation, file appeal, lose appeal, appeal that, repeat ad infinitum. Take case to highest court in the land, lose there. still that doesn't matter, because we'll go to the ECHR. Take that Supreme court!

The case will come before the Supreme Court next Wednesday, when the issue of legal costs will be decided.
lets see how much this has cost and who has to stump up for it, but three points for guessing who it'll most likely be.


Mr Ezeani said the State was not funding her case and legal costs would be phenomenal.
Which begs the question, who will be funding her case to the ECHR?

Two years ago, the ECHR asked the Government not to deport Pamela Izevbekhai until her case was heard at the Strasbourg Court. A decision on whether the ECHR will deport Ms Izevbekhai is expected in the coming months.
Yeah, best of luck with that one pam.

Tick tock........ tick tock.........tick tock.....

K-9

Can't see how she'd get costs awarded. How she'll pay them if they aren't, is another matter! :eek:

donkey balls

so if the state is not funding her costs who is? was it not last year that an IRISH couple lost there case against the govt over funding for their austistic son,and they had to pay the costs:mad: of the case.

K-9

donkey balls wrote: »

so if the state is not funding her costs who is? was it not last year that an IRISH couple lost there case against the govt over funding for their austistic son,and they had to pay the costs:mad: of the case.

No Win, No fees or maybe Pro Bono cases?

Grumpypants

donkey balls wrote: »

so if the state is not funding her costs who is? was it not last year that an IRISH couple lost there case against the govt over funding for their austistic son,and they had to pay the costs:mad: of the case.

They did loose but the government in fairness said they wont look for the money.

opo

Grumpypants wrote: »

They did loose but the government in fairness said they wont look for the money.

In this case, it will not be getting any money from Pam no matter what the decision.

The taxpayer will be left with the bill for everything other than her solicitors costs.

Pot Noodle =

Where have all the DoGooders gone it very quite from them

jmcc

Pot wrote:

Where have all the DoGooders gone it very quite from them

The press coverage of the case has also changed. Some had clearly been taken advantage of and realised what was going on when the succession of forged documents came to light. Other gullible fools in the media are keeping quiet hoping that there won't be investigations into their activities in this case. The usual Open Borders types of various ilks are probably still around and licking their wounds until the next case to which they can attach themselves to give their sad lives meaning. Apart from a very few honourable exceptions, the Irish media was an absolute disgrace in its coverage of this case.

Regards...jmcc

AlekSmart

The usual Open Borders type of various ilks are probably still around and licking their wounds until the next case to which they can attach themselves to give their sad lives meaning. Apart from a very few honourable exceptions, the Irish media was an absolute disgrace in its coverage of this case.

Very true,and in an amazing twist of fate Pamela Izevbekhai has cecome the rod which will be used to flay their backs each time they latch-on to yet another asylum case that "Ticks-all-the-Boxes".

Pamela Izevbekhai is now something of an encumberance to these professional State-Haters and I would suggest they will be fervently hoping she can melt away into the background.

The Irish Media,with the exceptions of the Sunday Times,have definitely some answering to do.

Several of the country`s top journalists and broadcasters caste all objectivity and caution to the wind in their race to identify with this case whilst denying the general public access to the forensic reportage which eventually lay the thing bare.

JonathanAnon

On the new today.. Izevbekhai owes "over 100,000 euro" in her own legal fees (From what the said the state will not be looking to have their own costs paid) .. Matthew Emeka Ezeani, the fifth solicitor to represent Ms Izevbekhai, was interviewed today and posed a question as to whether the Irish state would be chasing Izevbekhai, a single mother who wouldnt have the means to pay such fees. How long does this woman expect the Irish state to indulge her??? :mad:

caseyann

JonathanAnon wrote: »

On the new today.. Izevbekhai owes "over 100,000 euro" in her own legal fees (From what the said the state will not be looking to have their own costs paid) .. Matthew Emeka Ezeani, the fifth solicitor to represent , was interviewed today and posed a question as to whether the Irish state would be chasing Izevbekhai, a single mother who wouldnt have the means to pay such fees. How long does this woman expect the Irish state to indulge her??? :mad:

Isnt she still married? why isnt her husband paying their way? They know where he is so therefore he should be providing for those kids.

monkeypants

JonathanAnon wrote: »

fabricate legal documentation

Quick question; is this not an offence in itself? I'm fairly certain that I can't bring a bunch of made-up stuff to court with me.

caseyann

monkeypants wrote: »

Quick question; is this not an offence in itself? I'm fairly certain that I can't bring a bunch of made-up stuff to court with me.

I already said that loads of times,You would be charged with fraud and forgery.How she is still getting away with it is beyond a sham.

jmcc

Does this mean that her lawyers are now out of pocket? Perhaps they too can apply for NAMA.

Regards...jmcc

jmcc

monkeypants wrote: »

Quick question; is this not an offence in itself? I'm fairly certain that I can't bring a bunch of made-up stuff to court with me.

From what I remember of the proceedings (without checking back through the reports), the SC accepted that she was unaware the documentation was forged when it was being submitted. The forgeries were detected by expensive Garda and State investigations.

Regards...jmcc

mike kelly

is Pamela Izevbekhai still in Ireland?

donkey balls

mike kelly wrote: »

is Pamela Izevbekhai still in Ireland?

yep:mad:

mike kelly

donkey balls wrote: »

yep:mad:

what will it take to get rid of her? this country has gone to the dogs. Is there any political party who can get rid of asyulm cheats?

caseyann

jmcc wrote: »

From what I remember of the proceedings (without checking back through the reports), the SC accepted that she was unaware the documentation was forged when it was being submitted. The forgeries were detected by expensive Garda and State investigations.

Regards...jmcc

How could she not be aware of it,she claimed it?

mike kelly

caseyann wrote: »

How could she not be aware of it,she claimed it?

The state just didn't want to charge as they feared media pressure

donkey balls

mike kelly wrote: »

what will it take to get rid of her? this country has gone to the dogs. Is there any political party who can get rid of asyulm cheats?

the parties are afraid to speak out about her and others sure you just have to look at the last elections in west dublin were nearly every party had an african canidate.

caseyann

donkey balls wrote: »

the parties are afraid to speak out about her and others sure you just have to look at the last elections in west dublin were nearly every party had an african canidate.

I am sorry if they are not born Irish they shouldn't be candidates for any politics here.

mike kelly

just wondering when Ireland changed and became all PC...was it the election of Mary Robinson?

K-9

caseyann wrote: »

I am sorry if they are not born Irish they shouldn't be candidates for any politics here.

DeV would have been chuffed! Maybe not a bad thing when you look at it that way!

mike kelly

K-9 wrote: »

DeV would have been chuffed! Maybe not a bad thing when you look at it that way!

Dev was not born in Ireland but he was born irish.

caseyann

K-9 wrote: »

DeV would have been chuffed! Maybe not a bad thing when you look at it that way!

I never liked dev been honest.I am a collins woman


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRL_QfjjC24

K-9

mike kelly wrote: »

Dev was not born in Ireland but he was born irish.

Half Irish.

The Corinthian

caseyann wrote: »

How could she not be aware of it,she claimed it?

It would have to be proven and first of all they would have to prove that her claims were false (her failure to get asylum is based on her failure to prove that the claims are true, which is quite a different thing) and this would be a rather complex, not to mention expensive, matter. Add to this what to do with her daughters if she was convicted and the media fallout, and I can see why the government would shy away from it.

Nonetheless, I do think that criminal prosecution is warranted in such a case because setting an example would act as a deterrent in the future against fraudulent asylum cases that feel they can break any law in the pursuit of the asylum as all that the worst that will happen is deportation.

caseyann wrote: »

I am sorry if they are not born Irish they shouldn't be candidates for any politics here.

This is the kind of rubbish that I really had hoped this thread would not devolve to when I started it.

It's also not terribly well thought out, because by that logic anyone who simply happened to be in the state at birth would qualify and anyone who was not (e.g. the children of Irish diplomats) would not. As has been pointed out De Valera would have failed to qualify - he wasn't even fully Irish by blood (hint: he wasn't called O'Valera).

It all just smacks of hysterical Alf Garnettesque xenophobia.

You should be able to run for election if you are a citizen, simple as that. There are more than enough safeguards for this to be sufficient qualification, and frankly I'd rather vote for a naturalized citizen than some gobshìte offspring of a former Fianna Fail/Fine Gale/Labour incumbent who gets elected through that curious peerage system which is our democracy.

caseyann

The Corinthian wrote: »

It would have to be proven and first of all they would have to prove that her claims were false (her failure to get asylum is based on her failure to prove that the claims are true, which is quite a different thing) and this would be a rather complex, not to mention expensive, matter. Add to this what to do with her daughters if she was convicted and the media fallout, and I can see why the government would shy away from it.

Nonetheless, I do think that criminal prosecution is warranted in such a case because setting an example would act as a deterrent in the future against fraudulent asylum cases that feel they can break any law in the pursuit of the asylum as all that the worst that will happen is deportation.

Then they are not strong enough and dictated to by fear

This is the kind of rubbish that I really had hoped this thread would not devolve to when I started it.

It's also not terribly well thought out, because by that logic anyone who simply happened to be in the state at birth would qualify and anyone who was not (e.g. the children of Irish diplomats) would not. As has been pointed out De Valera would have failed to qualify - he wasn't even fully Irish by blood (hint: he wasn't called O'Valera).

It all just smacks of hysterical Alf Garnettesque xenophobia.

You should be able to run for election if you are a citizen, simple as that. There are more than enough safeguards for this to be sufficient qualification, and frankly I'd rather vote for a naturalized citizen than some gobshìte offspring of a former Fianna Fail/Fine Gale/Labour incumbent who gets elected through that curious peerage system which is our democracy.

You can paint it as xenophobic all you like,its very well thought out,devalera is half Irish makes him Irish in my book.Even though i dont like the man.If you aren't born on Irish soil nor do you have Either parent of Irish nativity or second generation,you should not be allowed run for any kind of office.Same as the Irish or any other nationality shouldn't be allowed in their adopted countries.I stand by what i believe.