PUP fraud €183k, should the guilty be stripped of citizenship?

"The judge rejected arguments by the Minister that only part of section 19.2 should be struck down and granted declarations that section 19.2 and 19.3 be struck down in their entirety.

It was not necessary, she held, to strike down section 19.1 which contains the ministerial power to revoke and the grounds for such revocation.

Noting the concerns of Mr Damache and the IRHEC that, to strike down section 19.2 and 19.3 while leaving in place section 19.1 could lead to the possibility of revocations taking place with no safeguards, she said it was “manifestly clear” the process provided for in section 19.1 did not provide the procedural safeguards required to meet the high standards of natural justice applicable to a person facing the severe consequences of revocation of citizenship.

The concerns of Mr Damache and the IRHEC could be met by the declarations striking down sections 19.2 and 19.3, she said. It is “inconceivable” that any contested revocation of a certificate of naturalisation would take place without appropriate safeguards having been put in place, she said."

Norms change over time, with the backing of any government. The changes in Ireland since the joining of the EU/EC are proof of that. Laws can be rolled back, and policies can be changed if there is enough support for it.

Let's take the most prosperous period of the country, at any point in its history, and roll back the laws and policies that helped make this happen?

Regressive, backward, nonsensical.

You conveniently ignored the current state of the UK, which actually went down the path you are proposing, when you did your vague assessment of European sentiments.

And whatever about Poland, Hungary is pursuing fascist ideals, let's be clear about that.

That's literally the Brexit argument in a nutshell. An argument, as we have seen to be based on lies, manipulation and deflection.

The UK was struggling economically before it joined the EU, and is struggling economically since it left.

You can't say what 'the majority' would say, because you've no evidence to support it.

It's much more curious how people are actually arguing for a discrimatory environment for people with acquired citizenship, before they even commit a crime.

At least one poster has made it clear in recent posts, their support for such an ideal is largely driven by their dislike of the concept of multiculturalism rather than any stringent desire to respect Ireland. That in itself is a clue as to what's really going on here.

That and the comparative lack of disinterest about Irish people who commit similar crimes of even greater value.

And of course the consistent focus on people from typically non-white countries and ignoring the 400k UK people who acquired Irish Citizenship when arguing that the penalty for committing certain crimes ('certain' as yet undefined) should be deportation.

And also curious is that it is often the case that many voices proclaiming love for their country, are loudest when using this supposed love as a stick to fight on other topics.

These people never seem to start conversations about how to make the country better through their own action, but instead use their faux patriotism as some sort of shield to hopefully absolve them and prevent them from being called out for what truly motivates them. Which, to remove any doubt, in my view, is racism in many cases.

We've seen this hijacking of national pride in the US, we've seen it in the UK, and we see it being attempted in Ireland. Thankfully, mostly by only a handful of zealots. But it's frequently why I get involved in these conversations on here, because I'm not going to leave them to stand comfortably on their soap boxes and use the absence of a counterpoint as an argument that everyone agrees with them.

We ban dual citizenship and we wouldn't be the only Europe not to allow dual or multiple citizenships,

But I'm sure someone will still complain it's not fair

For someone who loves to call others out on supposed strawman arguments, you don't seem to have any difficulty in throwing them out yourself. It's true that I see the negatives of multiculturalism (as it is implemented now) as far outweighing the benefits.. but to say that I have no desire to respect? Ireland. That's a leap based on nothing that I have written.

You should read it again, that isn't what I said. My view is based on your, and not just you alone, being focused on taking part in discussions where the topic is knocking down others as opposed to changing your behaviour in some/any way to help Ireland be better in some way or form.

The belief that they are different scenarios, and can be dealt with differently, does not mean that people are disinterested. Another assumption requiring a leap of logic based on nothing provided on this thread.

Again, the absence of comparative conversation on such events is evidence that they view 2 people committing the same crime differently.

I.e. in a discriminating manner.

@Gatling wrote:

Pretty sure if you asked the same people whether they think all expat criminals should be sent home rather than put in prison, they'd say definitely not, we don't want them. It's because people on the conservative spectrum tend to be inherently selfish and hypocritical, mé-féiners rather than having some grand ideological notions about the nature of governance.

This reminds me a bit of the Lisa Smith thread, where posters who relentlessly bang on about 'send them back where they came from' suddenly were aghast at the idea of Lisa Smith being sent back where she came from.

There was a referendum in 2004 on the anchor babies rule. Over 70% voted to change it.

Labour and some other parties now want that changed. Do you think it should be changed against the will of the people?

If a person obtains Irish citizenship by fraudulent means, he or she should be deported.

If not, their citizenship is the same as the descendants of Brian Boru. If they commit criminal acts, they should face the same consequences as any other Irish citizen who did likewise.

As is usually the case with these things, it would probably cost more than it's worth to chase down and prosecute these cases and it would be cheaper for the state to just take the losses on the fraudulent claims on the chin.

Happens to be true but is also a total cop out from the authorities and suits them. Also, the do gooder media would have a feeding frenzy on it if they did persue people. Ah jaysis joe, dey are takin de money off of de vudneridible.

Come for a better life ,or a better payout on criminal enterprise and we get faux tears of equality