American seeking asylum needs observers for Supreme Court appeal

international | rights, freedoms and repression | news report

Wednesday April 09, 2008 16:37

by Ray - various orgs.(pers cap) - knows the appellant

Making sure justice is seen to be done

A New Yorker who was a witness at the scene of the World Trade Centre bombing in 1993 has filed documentation in the Supreme Court that the Ministry for Justice here suppressed evidence in her claim for asylum. She is requesting that activists, members of the public or people interested in immigration/asylum issues come to her Supreme Court appeal on Friday April 11, at 11 am at the Four Courts, Dublin (I assume).

I met Ms. L several days ago (I have known her for the past three years), and she expressed the worry that in the absence of impartial observers at her Supreme court appeal, both the Irish authorities and the security agencies of her home country (the United States) would perpetrate abuses of process so as to deny her asylum and return her to the persecution she fears awaits her should she be returned unwillingly to the United States. Given what we have had confirmed over the past few years about the modus operandi of the US intelligence and security services, her fears are not imaginary. In any case, sympathy both moral and practical for a vulnerable individual in Ireland's biased and manifestly unjust asylum system is not only natural, but the duty of any conscious and concerned citizen.

I shall let Ms. L make her appeal in her own words:

"Dear_________

Please attend in person and/or urge your associates to come show your interest in these proceedings.

This concerns the courts' extraordinary refusal to hear evidence of government lies, suppression of evidence, and cooperation with human rights abuses by the CIA in Ireland in a case concerning a question of risk to the life of an elected official.

The courts' treatment of this case is all the more aberrant considering that the respondents (in this case the Refugee Appeals Tribunal and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, et al.) have explicitly and implicitly admitted the Applicant's (Ms. L's) allegations, both in writing and in court.

Why has the Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to the Constitutional validity of a statute; a question in which their jurisdiction is inalienable?

Why did the Supreme Court decline jurisdiction suddenl and extraordinarily in direct response to evidence of government collusion in CIA human rights abuses in Ireland?

Why did former Minister for Justice Michael McDowell and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court personally preside over these shocking travesties?

PLEASE COME TO COURT!

'If you don't give him shelter, he'll have no place to hide!'"

save preference

Comments (4 of 4)

details??

by normal bloke

Thu Apr 10, 2008 14:38

Does Ms. L have a name and case number? Who would go on the off chance without such basic details?

More details.

by Ray - Various

Thu Apr 10, 2008 16:11

I have been in contact with Ms. L. again - she's cool with these details going up:
Appellant name - Ms. Lovejoy.
Supreme Court Appeal #436-2006
Venue: Supreme Court courtroom, the Four Courts.
Date and time: 11am, Friday 11th April.

Looking for more info.

by interested

Fri Apr 11, 2008 10:13

Do you have a link for the original High Court case thats being appealed to the Supreme court?

Can't find it on www.courts.ie

American seeking asylum in Ireland

by Ms. L

Sun Apr 13, 2008 17:35

Thanks for your interest. To make a short story long:

Although I qualify for political asylum (according to accepted international criteria from United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees (UNHCR) this cirteria has been disregarded in my case, and in many others.

The Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL) has reported that the appeal system for decisions on refugee status is prone to manipulate a "rubber stamp" confirmation all decisions. (I paraphrase their report "Justice Matters" "The Case of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal."

The only option to challenge that system is judicial review in the High Court.

In case number 2004-1157-JR I applied for judicial review and WAS SUCCESSFUL: Respondents (The Refugee Appeals Tribunal ("RAT") & Minister For Justice) consented that the decision in my case should be vacated "ON THE GROUNDS SET FORTH": that is, on the grounds I alleged: disqualifying political bias. That is, a Justice Department known to cooperate in CIA human rights abuses cannot decide asylum applications of victims of CIA human rights abuses.

But unlike every other type of judicial review, ONLY REFUGEES DO NOT THEN WIN THEIR CASE: they are forced to go back to the same corrupt, biased tribunal and go thru their case all over again.

It is a violation of Constitutional justice.

Predictably, I was returned to RAT and refused again.

NOW THE COURTS REFUSE TO HEAR MY JUDICIAL REVIEW EVEN THOUGH THE RESPONDENTS HAVE ALREADY ADMITTED THAT THEY HAVE DISQUALIFYING BIAS IN MY CASE.

Second Judicial review High Court Case #2005-625-JR

Supreme Court Appeal NUmber 436-2006

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Voltaire Network

American seeking asylum needs observers for Supreme Court appeal

Comments (4 of 4)