Tomso is an Irish Citizen in Hiding - His Mom Was Deported

by Eoin Dubsky Thu Sep 16, 2004 20:19

Office of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
94 St. Stephen's Green
Dublin 2
Telephone: + 353 1 6028202
Fax: + 353 1 6615461
Email: [email protected]

Thanks JD for setting the word straight and getting the word out about Tomso onto the internet (and much thanks and respect to RAR too!).

On a sorta comic note, when you click on the link under "where to apply [as an asylum seeker or refugee to Ireland]" on the Government's public information website OASIS, you arrive at a page with a login and password prompt. If you don't know the password (click 'cancel') you get this message: "Error 401
You are not authorized to perform this operation". ( see: http://www.oasis.gov.ie/moving_country/seeking_asylum/refugees_asylum_seekers_introduction.html )

Oh one last thing... 'mama' and 'papa' are also commonly used for Mr. and Mrs., like Papa Wemba (Congolese popstar, quite popular in France).

by Tom Thu Sep 16, 2004 20:42 olearys at oceanfree dot net

I prefer Mam or mother...or even mom to mammy...which when used makes one sound as if they're Tomso's age. Actually, I hear mammy used more by women than men and more often in the west than east coast.

...anyway...whether Tomso is a "citizen" of Ireland or not, obviously, the best place for any child is with his mother if there is no abuse occurring in the home. He is (or will be once documentation is completed) also a citizen of Nigeria. Is the Nigerian consulate showing any interest in this case? Perhaps they should be contacted by somebody who is well versed in the history of this case:

Embassy of the Fed. Rep. of Nigeria
56 Leeson Park,
Dublin 6,
Rep. of IRELAND.
Tel: 604366,604051,604092

I'd like to see some evidence that the gardai or State are doing nothing to locate Tomso. I find that hard to believe. If it is true, then that matter should urgently be brought to light publically and accountability demanded. Wouldn't her sisters bring the child to the gardai so that he could be reunited with his/her mother? Perhaps they made arrangements in advance that if and when she was deported that they act as his/her guardians and not reunite them so that he can remain?

by Phuq Hedd Thu Sep 16, 2004 21:21

QUOTE: "1. His guardian ' sisters ' are no doubt recieving benefits which are putting food on his table."
ANSWER: And those benefits are carefully calculated to be the absolute minimum and thus are probably not enough to look after the needs of his "aunties" and of this child. Now, if those "aunties" could work legally then they'd be able to look after him as well as themselves.

QUOTE: " 2.His lying mother choose not to take him with her because she knew her rightfull legal deportation was imminent and thought that not having her child might delay proceedings."
ANSWER: "Lying"? About what? Are you privy to some information the rest of us don't have or are you just slandering someone from the comfort of your spittle-stained keyboard?

QUOTE: " 3.In the time that ' family' have been in ireland they have done nothing but be a burden on the state and its fed up taxpayers."
ANSWER: So, allow them to work so that they can be a resource to Ireland instead of a drain. They want to work, I want them to work. It's only kneejerk, racist fools that don't want immigrants to be able to work.

QUOTE: " 4. And guess what , the tax payer foots the bill to send them back after giving them a two year holiday at the hotel taxpaying worker."
ANSWER: I can't parse this sentence. Perhaps you should try one of the taxpayer-funded community college basic literacy schemes "Joe". It'll help you to communicate effectively with some of the highly-educated immigrants that have been trained to speak standard English in their own countries.

QUOTE: " 5. I cant believe one of you idiots hasnt tried to adopt him as his father is a no show and his mum could have taken him back but choose not to , thus demonstrating less compassion to her child than the mercifully tolerant irish state has shown them already"
ANSWER: Well now, that depends on just how bad the situation is in her own country doesn't it?

by jeff ( bad) Fri Sep 17, 2004 16:56

Don't deport him, bring back his mother, sort out this very Irish beuracratic sham.

While not knowing the full facts here, I don't think the mother would have gone to a Cop shop and leave her kid behind if she thought Ireland's finest GAA players were going to jump up from behind her desk and throw her out of the country.

I myself am a stern advocate of immigration controls, but I think the comments that were negative, that is, two of them, one which was deleted, show a rather callous disregard for people.

When I was young and stupid, I laughed about crack heads in front of a Garda. The reaction of the Garda to my comment was not the stereotypical one I expected; he was sickened and appalled by my stupid comment; it showed on his face.

So while Gardai may have conservative views on drug use, a lot actually do not want to squash drug addicts like insects.

Now, while most immigrants are definatly not druggies, they are still a marginalised group, and deserve a bit of humane respect, no matter what your opinion on immigration is.

Real life sucks, people like ' Good' only help make it more unpalatable. My only hope is that 'Good' meets the love of his/her life, and that loved is not reciprocated, simply because the unreciprocator knows that 'Good' is lacking that certain ' je ne c'est quoi'.

That will be the ultimate, God sanctioned pain he/she will have to live with. Either that or someone else important to 'Good' will wake up and realise what an insignificant wee mortal ' Good' is.

In the meantime, I hope everything works out for Tomso and his mum.

by Amo Fri Sep 17, 2004 17:57

Jeff, she went to the Garda station to sign on. This is what you do when you are subject to a deportation order. There is no subtance to your assertion that she was caught by surprise. The opposite is more plausible - explaining why she left the child behind.

by no. Fri Sep 17, 2004 18:12

asylum seekers have to sign on regardless of when they are chosen to be deported - its a regular thing so they can be tracked. it is entirely plausible that she did not know it would happen that day.

by AB Fri Sep 17, 2004 22:35

So a reminder every day isnt enough?

Exactly what is?

by dave h Sat Sep 18, 2004 00:42

Just a point.

Asylum seekers do not have to "sign on" in a Garda station every day.

Prospective deportees do.

No surprises Qui?

by Sean Daly Sat Sep 18, 2004 15:12

That last comment is right. Every country tries to defend its borders against immigration by people who are unwilling to obey its law. If you take a look at the Nigerian Constitution, easily found on the internet, it turns out that Nigeria's immigration law is far stricter than ours.For several years from the late 90s onwards mass immigration to Ireland was out of control. It's improved a bit recently, but the people (as shown by massive Yes vote in referendum) remain unhappy, because it seems Irish immigration policy is made in Lagos or Kinshasha, not in Dublin.

by Amo Sat Sep 18, 2004 19:48

There are some unanswered questions in the article.
1. What was the basis for Angels claim for refugee status?
2.On what basis was her application refused?


These questions were already asked. The asylum systerm is discharged with decideding if a believable/valid claim has been made under UNHCR guidelines and the decision making body is completely independent of the Government.

They also allow appeals and then the legal system is empowered to review the case.

Angel is quite entitled to tell the media whatever she wants but she is not entitled to be believed after all the time/effort/money pumped into deciding her claim.

by jeff Sun Sep 19, 2004 16:12

Maybe she does have to sign on as a 'potential deportee', but a days notice is not enough. I have, as already stated, my own views on immigration, I definatly do not believe in open borders.

However, I hate the snotheads who feel they must rub it in, so to speak. I hope they experience 'pain through circumstances'. So to speak.

Hey, why don't we all walk past homeless people next time they are tapping on the streets, and kick the cup out of their hands. It must be their fault, not participating in our liberal, vibrant economy. They all deserve to be spat on.

No questions asked!

by moonwolf Sun Sep 19, 2004 18:23

There are some unanswered questions in the article.
1. What was the basis for Angels claim for refugee status?
2.On what basis was her application refused?

It would seem to me that IF Angels claim was based on false or misleading information then she was validly deported and bears some personal responsibility for the situation in which Tomso finds himself.

If however, her claim was valid and her deportation was illegal then this state and it's citizens bear responsibility.

Does Rejade know the answers to the above questions?
Finally, where is Angel now?

Either way, there are some people who have a child in their care who should be either with his mother or in the care of the state.

As an aside to this, a friend of mine who had been illegal in the U.S for the past seven years recently came home for the first time to visit his dying mother. On attempting to re enter the U.S he was stopped and legally denied entry. Since then his business has failed, his apartment has been repossessed as has his truck. He had been due to marry a U.S citizen in the summer and this has now had to be cancelled.Unfortunately for him the fact that he is Irish is not something he can use in his defence against his legal deportation.So don't labour under the illusion that this is the only country where these things happen, or that race is a defence against legal deportation.

When the allegation of racism is used to object to legitimate decisions of the courts etc it creates a "cry wolf" situation, so that when actual racism occurs it is much harder to garner support against it because the charge of racism has been misused in the past. It does nothing in protection of those who are genuinely being racially abused or discriminated against to support spurious allegations of racism. It is all to easy to cry "racist" when one dosen't want to debate the actual issues involved in an open and forthright fashion, and it would appear that this tag is being used against anyone attempting to engage in honest debate in a fashion that can only be described as bullying. Bullying is an offence which has recently been dealt with by legislation through the Oireachtas, and it is now incumbent on all organisations in this country to have an anti bullying policy in place. Finally it is not only morally unjust, but also unlawful to defame an individual in this society and the use of the term "racist" without any reasonable supporting evidence is defamatory and actionable through the Irish courts.

by a human being from earth Sun Sep 19, 2004 18:53

""Finally it is not only morally unjust, but also unlawful to defame an individual in this society and the use of the term "racist" without any reasonable supporting evidence is defamatory and actionable through the Irish courts.""

What is morally unjust is that a child has been seperated from his mother.

the article did not acuse you or anyone of being racist, however your kneejerk sensitivites on the issue of race reveal more than you realise. read between your own lines

by moonwolf Sun Sep 19, 2004 23:20

Yes it is morally unjust to remove a child from it's mother, unless the child is in danger.In this case there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that the child was in danger while with his mother, so again yes it is morally unjust.
However, the child was not removed from his mother, his mother left him with a friend or sister and then refused to say where he was in order that he could be reunited with her. It is easy to take the simplistic view and blame the state for everything, however if, and again I repeat IF, angel gave false or misleading info on her application then she shares in the responsibility for his current situation. If she didn't and was unjustly deported then the state is completely responsibile.

Finally, If Angel was justifiably deported, thats IF, and she is then claiming that it is a racist decision when it is not that would be crying wolf, my point is that if a person is crying wolf and there is an attempt to raise support, it discredits those trying to raise support so that when actual racist decisions are made it makes it much more difficult to raise support for the victims of that racism.

As regards the article accusing me of racism, i dont know where you got that idea as i certaintly don't suggest that ,and that would be a not be a matter for discussion in this forum.

by Frifry Mon Sep 20, 2004 11:30

Many think that it is morally unjust to abuse the asylum system of a Country too. last count it was approx 80% of this one!!

by Sam Adams Mon Sep 20, 2004 19:24

"Residents against Racism" ??? Just who are these people (this person) ? The only spokesperson I've ever heard sounds like she's English. Maybe she needs to take a look at English racism (including that of the anti-Irish variety !)

by Brian O'Dea Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:36

They are a genuine anti-racist group, and none of them, whatever their backgrounds has to answer to you, "Sam".

by moonwolf Wed Sep 22, 2004 03:21

The proposition has been put forward that there is no such thing as race, personally I don't have enough info on it to make a choice as to whether the proposition is credible. However if it were true, IF, would that then mean that there is no such thing as racism?

It would seem to me that it naturally follows that if race dosen't exist then one cannot be discriminated against on the basis of race.

Can anybody clarify this ? preferably in a non abusive fashion, since it is an honest query.

by pat c Wed Sep 22, 2004 12:15

well, molecular studies of dna suggest that we all have a common ancestor, about 300,000 years back. the idea of race is a construct just as nations are a construct. but constructs such as race have a very strong reality when they are used by people who try to suggest that one race is superior to another.

by pat c Wed Sep 22, 2004 16:53

This piece might be of interest. Note that black members of congress seem to have few probs with the term black.
;) pat

October 4th conference to examine issues in race and genetics
22 Sep 2004

The Congressional Black Caucus and The Johns Hopkins University will host a meeting of African American leaders to examine issues in race and genetics on October 4 from 9 a.m. until 5:30 p.m., at the Marriott At Metro Center, 775 12th Street NW, Washington, DC. Reporters, editors, producers and others are welcome to attend.

Understanding the genetic basis of diseases that disproportionately affect the Black community could lead to improved prevention, treatment, and cures. Until now, there has been too little research to fully understand the role of biological and genetic differences in racial health disparities. The meeting, entitled IMAGN! Increasing Minority Awareness of Genetics-Now!, will address the current status of genetic medicine, future directions for genetics research, and the potential uses -- or misuses -- of genetics outside of the medical context.

"The assignment of 'race' can be traced through American history as having a direct impact on the current health outcomes and health disparities confronting the Black community. The prevalence of diseases such as hypertension, diabetes and the overall state of African American health constitutes a national crisis. It's time to discuss these issues very candidly," says Congressman Elijah Cummings, Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

"This conference will be an important step in providing the necessary tools to assist the CBC and other leaders in the African American community to discover just how advances in genetics can best be harnessed to help alleviate current health disparities," says Congresswoman Donna M. Christensen, who chairs the CBC Health Braintrust.

Note to Editors: Reporters and others interested in attending this conference must register by Sept. 30 at
http://www.event-wizard.com/imagn

With Funding From:
The Pew Charitable Trusts
The National Institutes of Health &
The U.S. Department of Energy

The Genetics and Public Policy Center is a part of the Phoebe R. Berman Bioethics Institute at The Johns Hopkins University and is funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts. http://www.dnapolicy.org

Contact: Rhoda Washington
[email protected]
202-663-5971
Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions


Full article at: