gardai stopped by african mob in paris,cunning asylum deportee returns to eire

A CHINESE national who sought refugee status in Ireland after claiming to be a persecuted Christian has been described by a judge as "audacious" in his claims.

Mr Justice Brian McGovern said the asylum seeker, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had ultimately admitted he knew nothing about Jesus, the name of Jesus's mother, or where he had been born.

In a statutory questionnaire, he had been unable to state how or where Jesus had died, what miracles he had performed, or anything about the Bible or gospels.

Mr Justice McGovern told Anthony Moore, counsel for the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, that the applicant for asylum had been unable to demonstrate how to bless himself or say the Lord's Prayer, yet he had claimed to have been a Christian in his home country.

The applicant said he had attended "home churches", one of which he had escaped from when Chinese police had raided it and made arrests.

Refusing the 31-year-old chef leave to judicially challenge the tribunal's refusal to grant him asylum, Mr Justice McGovern said the application was devoid of substantial merit.

"The credibility issues are very significant in this case, and his application for refugee status was somewhat audacious to say the least," the judge said.

Jonathan Kilfeather, who appeared with barrister Karl Monahan for the Chinese national, earlier told the court the applicant had left school when he was 14. He had fled his homeland for fear of state persecution because of his Christian beliefs.

Mr Justice McGovern is one of a number of judges sitting during the High Court holidays in an attempt to deal with a backlog of asylum applications.

He awarded legal costs against the Chinese national.

moonpurple wrote: »

how much in legal aid would this have cost us?
barrister and solicitor both sides of this man's audacity, the loveable rogue
1000-3000 euros
3000-6000 euros
6000-9000 euros

Rosco1982 wrote: »

Nothing. Costs were awarded against him according to the article.

Dionysus wrote: »

It is highly unlikely (to understate things) that the aforesaid asylum seeker has the finances to pay these costs.

In this most likely of events, who will then have to pay the costs of his action (and all attendant costs)?

Let me guess: the Irish taxpayer? (or will our wig-wearing barristers with affected accents accept their loses and refuse to be bailed-out by this republic?)

moonpurple wrote: »

the irish taxpay paid for all fees

the sol and barr for him and for the state
legal aid fees for him

I would expect it cost you around 10,000 euros as preliminary mentions in the high court before hearing will be billed as a day in court:eek: