Mother may begin asylum proceedings

A woman who was deported from Ireland to Nigeria but later re-entered here with two of her children has been given leave by the…

A woman who was deported from Ireland to Nigeria but later re-entered here with two of her children has been given leave by the High Court to bring legal proceedings to have herself and the children declared asylum seekers.

Olwakemi Adedaju Dada and two of her children, aged 10 and 12 years, were among several Nigerians deported to Lagos in high profile deportations in April 2004.

Ms Adedaju Dada arrived here in 1998 and her children came in the following two years. In her application for refugee status, refused in 1999, she claimed she had a fear of persecution if returned to Nigeria and alleged she had been subject to sexual assaults by soldiers there.

In her High Court proceedings, she claimed those sent back on the same flight to Nigeria were detained in Lagos and not released until €900 was handed over.

READ MORE

In an affidavit sworn in June 2004 in Nigeria, she said that when she had arrived at the offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau in April 2004 on foot of the deportation order, she had told an official that proceedings had been initiated challenging the order but he had crumpled up a fax from her solicitor and thrown it in a bin. She also claimed she and her children were treated in an abusive fashion while held at the bureau.

An affidavit sworn on behalf of the GNIB stated that no injunction was in existence restraining the deportations and it was contended that the applicant, while on the aircraft carrying the deportees, made no complaint about her treatment at the bureau.

In his reserved judgment yesterday, Mr Justice John McMenamin said the applicant had established serious and substantial grounds to bring judicial review proceedings seeking to have herself and her children granted refugee status and he would grant leave for those proceedings.

He stressed he was not expressing any view on the outcome of those proceedings. It was more appropriate that issues of credibility and the balancing of rights and obligations be dealt with at the full hearing.

Earlier, the judge noted the essence of the applicant's case was that no applications for asylum had been made for her two children and they were entitled to make such applications at any time while they are in the State, whether lawfully or unlawfully.

On the claim that those Nigerians deported in April 2004 were detained until €900 was paid, the judge said no evidence was adduced from any Nigerian lawyer or from those who may allegedly have paid the "bail" money in Lagos. He found the absence of supporting evidence "surprising".

He noted the applicant had said that, after her release by the Lagos authorities, she went into hiding from her ex-husband, who wished to have her children circumcised. As a result, she said she had to leave Nigeria and came back to Ireland via London and Belfast.

The judge said the applicant had not satisfied him that the absence of an injunction restraining the Minister for Justice from preventing her re-entering the country would lead to an invasion of her constitutional rights or those of her children and he refused leave to bring an application for such an injunction.

He noted counsel for the State had indicated that, if the court refused such an injunction, the question of the enforcement of the deportation order made against Ms Adedaju Dada (which would still continue in effect in the event of that refusal) would be a matter for the executive.

The issue of deportation was at the discretion of the Minister for Justice, he said.