Deported student to return

ArthurDent

On 10 o'clock news. Minister McDowell has reversed his decision on the Nigerian leaving cert student and he is to be allowed sit his exams.

I think this is the humane decision and welcome it.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/03/24/story195089.html

aodh_rua

An uncharacteristic change of heart from the Minister for Justice, which he has put down to some night-time reflection that caused him to decide his action was overly harsh.

I know that the human face of any deportation is difficult to deal with, but if the man in question got a fair crack at the system, and due process was followed, is the Minister's decision likely to open the floodgates for other 'mercy' cases? Personally, I would've let him see out his studies in the first place, but surely once a decision was taken, it should've been kept. The confusion and cost to bring him back is not doing the system any favours.

From breakingnews.ie

Deported student gets six month reprieve
24/03/2005 - 09:59:40

The deported Leaving Cert student Olunkunle Eluhanla is to be allowed to return for six months.

He will be given a six-month visa after the Minister for Justice Michael McDowell admitted he was wrong to leave the deportation go ahead.

Mr Eluhanla was among 35 Nigerians recently deported to Lagos on a specially-chartered flight following the rejection of their asylum applications.

aodh_rua

I see another thread opened after I started posting this one. Mods - feel free to delete or merge.

lad12

Yeah he shouldn't be allowed to return once the decision was made..Life's tough..So deal with it..

Threads merged

Well theres a common sense decision if ever I saw one.
As regards whether this will open the floodgates, he's been given a 6 month study visa, so I reckon that means that any other similar visa's will be given on a case by case basis as per the usual routine.
I'd reckon as well that the cure for this would be to speed up the asylum application process-It shouldnt take as long as it does to adjudge these and one swift appeal prcess would be enough imho.

Why do I have my doubts...

Villain

I can't understand why it is still taking so long to get these applications accessed, surely the government shoudl be looking to have a turn around time of a few months maximum. I don't have any issue with people been deported if their application is not successfull but deporting people after been here for several years and becomming part of the community is just crazy.

Boggle

I know that the human face of any deportation is difficult to deal with, but if the man in question got a fair crack at the system, and due process was followed, is the Minister's decision likely to open the floodgates for other 'mercy' cases?

Maybe its the system that is flawed and needs to be re-examined if this case soes not meet Asylum criteria....

pickarooney

aodh_rua wrote:

The confusion and cost to bring him back is not doing the system any favours.

Who was paying for his studies while he was here? Surely that would be a bigger waste of time and money if it were to just deport him at the end.

F Fiesta

A sad, sad day for the country.




When will the right people be put in power? That show strong leadership skills, care about our own people and is not influenced by a mere 200 students?


Oh the shame.

A Dub in Glasgo

A good day for the country and a good decision by McDowell

bonkey

aodh_rua wrote:

is the Minister's decision likely to open the floodgates for other 'mercy' cases?

I doubt it. There is no legal requirement to allow the kid to stay...he is simply being granted a visa to do so. The government can choose to grant visas to whomsoever it wishes, so I don't see this setting a worrisome precedent (although I suspect some recently-departed posters amongst others would disagree).

I find it somewhat amusing to note your choice of words, however. What is asylum itself but a granting of mercy? If we are to, on occasion, decide to be more merciful than the minimum that our own laws require....is that such a bad thing?

There is nothing in the article as to whether or not the government are going to pay for his return (which I suspect they probably will), or whether or not he will be entitled to any government monies whilst he is here. All that is in both statements (unless I'm missing something) is that he will be allowed to return, and will be allowed to sit his exams.

Personally, I would've let him see out his studies in the first place, but surely once a decision was taken, it should've been kept.

So, when you've taken a wrong turn, you continue down the wrong road rather than admit you've gone wrong?

The Minister has said that he made a mistake. Whether or not thats just a convenient cover for a more complex explanation or not, its the only explanation we have right now...and I'd rather see a Minister admit his mistakes and stand by what he believes is right rather than have him stand by something he believes is wrong.

jc

GuanYin

pickarooney wrote:

Who was paying for his studies while he was here? Surely that would be a bigger waste of time and money if it were to just deport him at the end.

Well thats the interesting thing. On a purely economic basis, letting him sit the LC was the correct thing to do. Why waste two years of money educating someone and then send them off with no product? I had to laugh as I've heard a couple of people argue for his deportation (including McDowell) who also take strong libe views against college dropout rates.

In the end, the humane and decent thing was done and I hope this paves the way for a better review system to stop such stupidity occuring again. I still would have preferred had the Govt held up its hands and apologised, instead of acting like it begrudgingly relented.

They still have to consider how they disrupted this schools preparations for the LC.

But all in all, given the situation, right choice made.

sleepwalker

well first off well done to his fellow students, his teachers and anybody else who let their voice be heard and well done to mcdowell a politican who is actually doing his job very well and yet is constantly criticized.

When will the right people be put in power? That show strong leadership skills, care about our own people and is not influenced by a mere 200 students?

how does this decision illustrate that the minister for justice not care for what you call "our own people" ? did he deport some irish people aswell or something ?

GuanYin

F Fiesta wrote:

A sad, sad day for the country.




When will the right people be put in power? That show strong leadership skills, care about our own people and is not influenced by a mere 200 students?


Oh the shame.

Give it a rest. Can you explain exactly why this is a sad day for the country?

Exactly what negative effect do you believe this will make to our country, socially, economically or legislatively?

I'll agree that the leadership is poor, they should never have deported him in the first place, and should have rectified the matter immediately, but the right descision was made.

Come on, less vague rubbish and more argument please.

landser

Appaling decision. I feel sorry for the guy in question. The process is too slow. But, his application was turned down, and that's that, whether he's been here two months or two years is not relevant.

The asylum process has to be speeded up and a rational debate re immigration entered into (viz. see Myers article in yesterday's I.T.)

I'm severely disappointed by the Govt's u-turn on this... 300 protest, 3.7m do not...

aodh_rua

Even though I'd like to think that the decision was based on compassion, I can't escape my cynicism and so this smacks to me of political opportunism. It gives McDowell a chance to show he has a heart, and while the young man gets to come back and sit his leaving cert, he's still facing deportation in a couple of months. Whatever pressure the ordinary student faces, he's got much more to worry about than simply getting points. This decision makes a mockery of the system, which will no doubt upset others who are waiting on decisions or worse still give them false hope. It will cost the taxpayer to get him back only to spend more re-deporting him. And who benefits - probably the Minister in the short-term, and in the long run, not Olunkunle Eluhanla.

pickarooney

landser wrote:

Appaling decision. I feel sorry for the guy in question. The process is too slow. But, his application was turned down, and that's that, whether he's been here two months or two years is not relevant.

Ach come on, that's a lot like saying if a man is condemned to life imprisonment and later proof comes out that he's innocent he should still serve the sentence because it was the original decision of the court.

bonkey

landser wrote:

The process is too slow. But, his application was turned down, and that's that, whether he's been here two months or two years is not relevant.

Why is it not relevant? Because his asylum application was refused, we have no obligation to consider what will result directly as a result of our inabaility to deal with his request in a timely fashion?

The asylum process has to be speeded up and a rational debate re immigration entered into

Both are required, but given the apparent inability of so many people to clearly distinguish between the two groups, I would hate to see any sort of "combined" debate or action on the subjects.

They are entirely seperate issues, other than that they both result in foreigners being allowed inside our borders for more than a holiday.

I'm severely disappointed by the Govt's u-turn on this... 300 protest, 3.7m do not...

So you have access to a statement from the minister where he explains that it was the small protest which changed his mind?

And why are you blurring the distinction between support and merely not voicing disapproval?

jc

aodh_rua

pickarooney wrote:

Ach come on, that's a lot like saying if a man is condemned to life imprisonment and later proof comes out that he's innocent he should still serve the sentence because it was the original decision of the court.

Not sure that logic holds - he is still 'guilty', but his sentence has been delayed so he can complete his studies. That's similar to the Annabel's case where one of the guilty parties was allowed to sit his finals before starting his sentence. I don't think the Minister said the deportation was wrong, he said that he didn't think it needed to be carried out with such immediacy.

GuanYin

aodh_rua wrote:

Not sure that logic holds - he is still 'guilty', but his sentence has been delayed so he can complete his studies. That's similar to the Annabel's case where one of the guilty parties was allowed to sit his finals before starting his sentence. I don't think the Minister said the deportation was wrong, he said that he didn't think it needed to be carried out with such immediacy.

And thats the compassionate thing to do. Let him back BECAUSe they made a mistake in deporting him immediately.

As far as your point regarding 3.7 million not protesting. I didn't protest, but I still support letting him back in. Do you think that its REALLY 301 vs 3,699,999?

Can you offer any proof that these are the figures for and against the deportation?

landser

Why is it not relevant? Because his asylum application was refused, we have no obligation to consider what will result directly as a result of our inabaility to deal with his request in a timely fashion?

So, do you suggest that we apply some sort of squatter's rights to the process? You ask me why is it not relevant, i ask you why is it? The fact that he was here for two years before deportation is unfortunate, but it does not change his status as a bogus asylum seeker. As for waht will result, presumably, nothing different than if he was deprted 18 minths ago... if he was in peril then he'll be in peril now

Both are required, but given the apparent inability of so many people to clearly distinguish between the two groups, I would hate to see any sort of "combined" debate or action on the subjects.

They are entirely seperate issues, other than that they both result in foreigners being allowed inside our borders for more than a holiday.

I know


So you have access to a statement from the minister where he explains that it was the small protest which changed his mind?

Troll


And why are you blurring the distinction between support and merely not voicing disapproval?

the use of the double negative here has thrown me... what were you trying to say?

GuanYin

landser wrote:

So, do you suggest that we apply some sort of squatter's rights to the process? You ask me why is it not relevant, i ask you why is it? The fact that he was here for two years before deportation is unfortunate, but it does not change his status as a bogus asylum seeker. As for waht will result, presumably, nothing different than if he was deprted 18 minths ago... if he was in peril then he'll be in peril now

The issue is more of a humanitarian one in my eyes. What exactly has the state to lose in allowing a 17 year old to finish the work he has spent the last two years of his life working for? He had been holding down a job and paying his own way, so exactly what does it cost the state to let him stay?

Troll

How is this a troll. You have based an argument on something that you have decided to be true, despite the fact you have no evidence to support it.

the use of the double negative here has thrown me... what were you trying to say?

Why are you avoiding answering the question? Thats the only Troll I've seen.

Its very simple. You are suggesting that the majority of Irish people didn't support the descision to let him return.

You seem to base this on the fact that only 300 turned out to protest. How do you make the leap that anyone who didn't protest didn't support the protesters?

F Fiesta

Exactly what negative effect do you believe this will make to our country, socially, economically or legislatively?

Quite simple really. He'll be sent back home in 6 months or so. Having done his Leaving Certificate in the mean time. What good is that for the Irish State?


And I am quite certain that the public were content with the initial decision, 200 students don't speak for the country.

Moriarty

F Fiesta wrote:

And I am quite certain that the public were content with the initial decision, 200 students don't speak for the country

.. any more than one random person posting on an internet forum.

D'Peoples Voice

landser wrote:

Appaling decision. I feel sorry for the guy in question. The process is too slow. But, his application was turned down, and that's that, whether he's been here two months or two years is not relevant.

The asylum process has to be speeded up and a rational debate re immigration entered into (viz. see Myers article in yesterday's I.T.)

I'm severely disappointed by the Govt's u-turn on this... 300 protest, 3.7m do not...

IMHO, from what I've heard of the case,
the facts that he supplied to not one but both the refugeee tribunal were in dispute, I hear. I interpret this to mean he LIED about certain details.

Then I hear he absconded in early february when he was told he had to present himself, he only presented himself in mid-March.

"Feel sorry for the guy" - it would seem he lied in his tribunal,
His own mother dosen't feel sorry for him, she deserted him, she could have brought him with her to the US.

From what I heard, when the gardai/immigration officials asked him if he wanted to go home to change out of his uniform, he declined, smart kid, it made the headlines that a refugee in his unifrom was being sent home.

when the imigration officials asked him if he wanted details of their counterparts in nigeria when he got off the place in Nigeria, he declined.

Then he said he was mugged, yet a penniless guy with no family managed to make it to a internet cafe to send an email to friends in Ireland to give details of his mugging. Of course we'd believe him, it's not as if he lied b4 in the tribunals.
so as for feeling sorry for him....

of course, maybe all of the above is hearsay, but will we ever know

AngelofFire

This is good day for human rights.

gandalf

Well common sense has prevailed. Why bother to give this man an education if you are not prepared to let him sit the exams and get the qualifications.

The people that demonstrated should be commended and I certainly agreed with them. I really dislike people like you F Fiesta who claim to know what the majority want and in future you may want to state that your comments are your own opinion and not decide to become a spokesman for the masses.

The majority of people I talked to including those that have quite un-pc attitudes to foreigners all agreed that deporting this student without allowing him complete his studies was short sighted and hasty. It takes a person with a very mean outlook on life to deny this person the opportunity to complete his studies.

logonapr

Dreadful decision.

Lots of emotion but bottom line is that this is a case where state was supporting this student who was deemed an illegal immigrant entirely.
His dependency on the state is therefore no different to any other immigrant living on social welfare.

If one hold the view that his deportation was wrong then surely it follows that we should be providing this state support to all immigrants and we then simply throw our borders open.

gurramok

F Fiesta wrote:

Quite simple really. He'll be sent back home in 6 months or so. Having done his Leaving Certificate in the mean time. What good is that for the Irish State?
.

Would the decision mean that he will be deported again in 6 months or does he have the right to seek work after he sits the exams ?

bonkey

D'Peoples Voice wrote:

of course, maybe all of the above is hearsay, but will we ever know

Well, as far as this discussion is concerned, it is only hearsay, as we've only heard it from you, with no sources other than what you've heard.

So, indeed, its second-hand hearsay.

jc

bonkey

F Fiesta wrote:

Quite simple really. He'll be sent back home in 6 months or so.

Quite probably.

Having done his Leaving Certificate in the mean time. What good is that for the Irish State?

I would imagine the terms "compassion" and "humanitarian" would figure strongly in the answer.

200 students don't speak for the country.

200 students didn't speak for the country. The Minister who's job it is to do so did so.

You're just suggesting that one was the trigger for the other. That doesn't make it so.

jc


jc