Pamela Izevbekhai is still in Ireland! Why?

jackpalance wrote: »

What are those Nigerians playing at?

normally its online poker

but on a serious note, the whole third world knows we're a soft touch race at this stage

netwhizkid wrote: »

She is a lier and has claimed she had a kid in 1994 which was lies, she came to Ireland under false pretences and has contributed nothing to Ireland other than tying up our legal system and costing the state money. She is not welcome in Ireland in my opinion over this. Oh yes the "Irish in America" argument, if this counts for anything it is that Americans are welcome in Ireland, I can't remember too many Irish settling in Nigeria over the centuries on the other hand.

There is fairness and justice but this woman has no place in Ireland and god help our future generations if people have not even got enough backbone to stand up and say enough is enough and deport her immediately.

I suggest anyone feeling sympathetic to this woman take two spoons of this stuff at night and eventually you may see sense. Even the most liberal marxists have now distanced this selves from her cause.

Your 'Americans welcome here' bit makes no sense. What has that got to do with anything?
Nigerians emigrating here are more akin to the first Irish to emigrate to America.
God help our future generations? Yeah, God help them if we abandon due process and instead rely on whether the likes of you consider people 'welcome' here.
As for the rest of your post; I couldn't be bothered responding.

Perhaps she is representing herself so that she may apply to come off record (following threats or whatever found in an email or overheard on the bus) and have the case dismissed.

That might be worth another dozen appeals and five years or so in the courts?

Two things come to mind on this case

1. Its clearly the legal system that is at fault. We seem to be a terriable country when it comes to laws. We can pass carbon laws in 6 months, plastic bag taxes in 6 days and water rates in 6 min's. How long has the pamela sh1t been going on. Bet the loopholes still have not been closed yet!

2. If she had no kids then i think she would be gone. I think the law is more protective when someone has kids. While this is good. This is where i think the problem lies and they know this when they come here!

green123 wrote: »

great post

the pamela case is just the tip of the iceberg.
there should be almost no nigerians in this country.

they have lots of chances to claim asylum before they arrive in ireland, so why dont they ?

Unfortunately this is not the case, due to the aptly named Dublin Convention, effectively a loophole for economic migrants to travel via a few countries to get to the most generous soft touch country which suits their lifestyle needs best.
If an Asylum seeker, lets call her Pamela for example gets wind that there are loads of hand outs and free stuff in this small little cold country half a world away, she can book a flight to Dublin via a Schipol normally, as long as she doesn't leave the airport on the way, Ireland is deemed to be her first port of entry.

It's a bloody disgrace, there are so many actual genuine asylum seekers who really need the protection and hospitality of the Irish nation, she (Pamela) has done immeasurable damage to the plight of real asylum seekers, the sort of people who are genuinely fearing for their lives and their kids lives, not repeating a well rehearsed line that gets them through customs and straight to the department of Foreign Affairs in a taxi with the hands out.

Between the Dublin convention and the Nice treaty we were the laughing stock of Nigeria for 10 years.

PoleStar wrote: »

The crux problem in this case is the Irish legal system.

Unlike most other countries, in Ireland you have an automatic right to appeal to a higher court. This is not the case in other countries. Therefore she can keep going with her appeals right to the top.

This illustrates a great flaw with "the system". The system was created by the people (via our elected representatives). It is not a tangible "thing", it is a set of rules set down by us. And yet now it is not us that rules the system but it is the system that rules us.

Most of us would recognise that while all deportees should have the right to a fair hearing, the idea of going through appeal after appeal is a very injudicious use of resources. And yet the system allows it. Surely it should be a simple matter for a bill to be passed which states that deportation cases can be dealt with in the circuit courts and allow appeal there in certain circumstances.

In any case, under the Geneva Convention, agreed by European countries, asylum seekers must seek asylum in the first county where they land. Therefore as there are no direct flights to Ireland from Nigeria, not a single Nigerian is entitled to seek asylum in this country. I simply dont understand why they cant be sent back to the other European country from which they flew into Ireland.

By the way, I do feel that Ireland should offer asylum to those who are genuinely in need of our help. However it is cases like this that sour the views of Irish people against them, and generate anger towards groups such as Residents Against Racism. What I dont understand is how such groups support cases like this. If they were to stand against her and recommend her deportation, it would generate more support for genuine asylum seekers.

There weren't direct flights between Nigeria and Ireland until December of last year. So there are now, yet that didn't stop plenty of Nigerians claiming that they came here directly.

People applying for asylum should apply for it at the point of entry into the country, so when they get off the plane, arrive at Dublin port etc they are supposed to claim asylum. The last RAC report showed that only 8% of asylum seekers applied for asylum at their point of entry. 92% applied at ORAC on Lower Mount Street.

The 92%is made of of two main groups = people who came in via Northern Ireland and lots of people on student visas ripped up their ID documents then claimed asylum.

So what I'm saying is that more than 92% of the people claiming asylum here are could be automatically excluded on a stricter reading of the rules. That said if you've ever seen the decisions made by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal you'll see in the early years when we needed workers the decisions were incredibly soft, but in the past three years with the economy slowing up the decisions have become a lot more robust.

Groups like Residents againts Racism/Reality really don't help matters. Not even the UNHCR supports claims like the ones we're being subjected to. I'd be a lot happier with the system if we took more programme refugees like the Rohinga people we took in last year and called time on the abuse of the asylum system by economic migrants.


On the issue of a bill to change the system, it's was brought forward after a long delay in 2008 but it's still on the long finger due to bigger problems facing the country right now. That and the numbers seeking asylum has dropped significantly in the past few years.

Like a hell of a lot of things in the legal system, the so called postcard is another red herring thrown in by the lawyers. They know well the woman is a fraud and are now pulling out and USING this as their reason. Bollox!

The reason this case has gotten so far is because mischievous people from around this country have been scuppering and sabotaging justice at every turn.

Pamela is only a small detail here. She isn't doing this alone!

ascanbe wrote: »

I'm about to bring some left - wing holier than thouness to the party right now; or at least some sanity.
Why is this woman being treated as some despicable criminal on here for using the judicial process of this country in order to do what she percieves as benifiting her and her children?
I have no idea if she has told lies; when she has exhausted the legal avenues available here if she is found to have done so she will be deported.
Let's just say she has told some lies? Does that make her so awful?
I'm pretty sure that everyone on here is related to, knows or is someone who has lied and flouted the laws of another country for their own benifit.
Should all the Irish people who have lived and worked illegally in America over the years be regarded as terrible people?
I don't think so. So why should she?
Really can't understand the vilification of her by some on here; presuming you're all motivated by rationale and justice.
If not then I suppose I can.

Yes.

Look at the number of years this case has been tied up in the courts, and the cost, not just in legal fees - and, frankly, if her case is dismissed and she and her daughters are deported, the state should look into the possibility of making enquiries with the Nigerian authorities about the possibility of recouping a portion of these costs from Pamela - but in manpower from the state defending the case and the cost of her trial, not to mention accommodating her and her daughters. If she has lied, she has wasted the money of Irish taxpayers by abusing the system for her own ends and, by doing so, it is likely that she has harmed the causes of future asylum seekers who may be fleeing from genuine harm.

If Pamela lied, then she is the boy who cried "wolf!" umpteen times, to the point where nobody believes her cries but she isn't going to be the one who is eaten by the wolf, it'll be the next boy who cries "wolf!" when a wolf really is there but whose claim will not be believed as easily because, after the Pamela Izevbekhai farce, people will be slow to believe future claims of flight from FGM, and even slower to pledge their support to claimants. Pamela was, by and large, taken at her word. The same will not be true of future asylum seekers making a similar claim.

If she believed that she and her family would be better off in Ireland, and this was the reason for her claim, then she should have attempted to come to Ireland through the proper channels for economic migrants, not by abusing a system designed for the protection of people who are at risk of persecution and death. To do so was inexcusable.

Victor_M wrote: »

Despite the monumental case against this absolute time and money wasting fraudster, I'm surprised that at least one member of the boards.ie high horse PC brigade hasn't paid a visit, there were loads of do-gooders supporting her before forged death certificates evidence was produced.

I'll gladly chip in for a one way ticket to Lagos for her if that the only thing keeping her here.

If they genuinely believed that the Izevbekhai girls were going to be mutilated if they were sent back to Nigeria, they can't be faulted for supporting her, nor can they be faulted for withdrawing that support once the "evidence" in her case was cast into serious doubt.

Perhaps she can stay on condition that Nigeria takes Seanie Fitzgerald.

P.

Victor_M wrote: »

By all means she should be allowed her innocent until proven guilty, but it's the militant gullibility of the let her stay crowd who scream abuse at anyone who doubt's the validity of their latest cause is shocking and a large part of the problem. These cut and dry cases should be assessed and either yes she's allowed stay or no she's on the next flight home and can plea her case from Nigeria at someone elses expense if she wants.

The race card is used so frequently and on such flimsy pretexts that it has lost its meaning - boy who cried "wolf!" again. It's not racist not to take everything somebody says at face value if that person happens to be of a different nationality, in fact, I'd say that it's racist to expect people too unless the same is expected from them where everybody is concerned.

In this case, it is for Pamela to prove that she stands in need of asylum, not for her word that she does to be accepted at face value and for the state to prove that this is not the case. The burden is on her to prove her case and if she fails to prove that she and her daughters need protection, or if she resorts to fraud in order to manipulate the system for her benefit, she can't expect to be given preferential treatment because she is Nigerian and it is not racist to deny her preferential treatment on the grounds of her nationality.

Victor_M wrote: »

If I was fleeing for my life, I wouldn't get the lonely planet out and look for a nice destination, nor would I research the most country with the most generous handouts, I'd get the hell out of the country and go anywhere to protect the safety of my family. Just like the Kunle debacle, the do gooders convinced Michael McDowell to allow him stay, he was arrested in Dublin airport for dodgy dealings with someone else's atm card and done for driving without tax and insurance.

If I was going to pick and choose between destination countries, I'd be looking at the success rates of asylum seekers there so I can't see myself picking Ireland.

As for the Kunle case, it was a mistake on Michael McDowell's part to yield to public pressure to bring him back in the first place. The fact that he had a troupe of supporters willing to throw tantrums and demand preferential treatment on his behalf did not make him more worthy of returning to Ireland than any of the other failed asylum seekers who were deported along with him and it was wrong for McDowell to act like it did.