Questions surrounding deportation still unanswered
NUMEROUS questions remain about the controversial circumstances in which student Olunkunle Elunkanlo was deported because both the Justice Minister and the Garda refuse to answer them.
The questions arise from the fact that the accounts of Michael McDowell and the Garda vary greatly with that of Mr Elunkanlo.
The established facts are these: Mr Elunkanlo was arrested on March 14 after presenting himself at the offices of the Garda National Immigration Bureau (GNIB) in Dublin.
That night, he was put on a chartered flight and deported to Nigeria together with 34 other people, nine of them children.
But what happened prior to, and after, the deportation is much disputed.
In an email to Deputy Joe Higgins, the 20-year-old said he had not been allowed to speak to his lawyer before being deported. Nor, he said, was he given opportunity to collect any belongings, and he was put on the plane in the clothes he was wearing at the time of arrest his school uniform.
Speaking in the Dáil on Tuesday night, the minister denied it all.
Basing his statement on a report given to him by the Garda, Mr McDowell said Mr Elunkanlo was advised to seek legal advice and given opportunity to collect his belongings, but declined.
The minister also refused to accept that the student had been deported while wearing his school uniform.
Mr McDowell went further.
"I have seen claims that the person in question was successively mugged and assaulted in Nigeria," he said.
"It is important to note that the charter flight was preceded by a senior Garda advance party, consisting of a detective inspector and detective sergeant, which situated itself in Lagos a day prior to the charter and remained there for 12 hours after the charter returned.
"On the flight, all adults, including the person who is the subject of this debate, were handed a letter by a member of the Garda team informing each of them of the presence of the two officers in the advance party in Lagos and that, upon disembarkation, they could contact them through the Nigerian immigration authorities for any necessary assistance. The person concerned did not seek any such assistance."
Mr Elunkanlo, however, says he was not given a letter while on the plane. Furthermore, based on his account of what happened upon disembarkation, he would have had little opportunity to contact the Garda officers in Lagos.
This is because, upon arrival in the city, he said he was handed over to Nigerian immigration authorities, who took him to the city's main prison, Alagbon.
Crucially, a Nigerian newspaper, "The Vanguard," last week appeared to support that claim, reporting: "On arrival, the deportees were received by police and immigration personnel, after which they were transferred to Alagbon."
Mr Elunkanlo said he eventually managed to bail himself out with the assistance of an inmate. It was after leaving the prison that he was assaulted.
On Thursday, the Irish Examiner emailed the Department of Justice a series of questions. These included:
l On March 19 in Lagos five days after his deportation from Ireland the Associated Press took a photograph of Olunkunle Elunkanlo in a school jumper. The minister said he was informed that Olunkunle was "not wearing clothes which could be described as a school uniform" when deported. How does the minister account for the discrepancy?
"The Vanguard" reported that the 35 deportees were taken to Lagos's main prison by the immigration authorities. This is consistent with Olunkunle's account of what happened to him. Does the minister accept that this was the case?
l If so, could the minister have reasonably expected that any of the 35 deportees would have been able to contact either Garda officer who remained in Lagos for 12 hours after the flight landed?
l Olunkunle's account of what happened to him differs to the account provided to the minister by the Garda. Does the minister believe that the Garda report is fully accurate?
In an emailed response, the department said the questions were a matter for the Garda press office, as they related "to operational details that are best known to the GNIB."
However, a Garda press office spokesman said the questions were, in fact, a matter for the minister. "The minister said whatever he said," he stated, before stressing that he had "no reason to believe that the (Garda) report was inaccurate."
The press office later issued a statement, which read: "An Garda Síochána carry out deportations in accordance with the law. It is not our policy to discuss individual cases."
Meanwhile, when pushed on the matter, a spokeswoman for the minister said: "He can only accept a report on face value." But, like the Garda spokesman before her, she said Mr McDowell had no reason to believe it was inaccurate.
Of course, Mr Elukanlo has now been allowed to return to Ireland, yet the questions remain. The refusal of the minister and Garda to provide clarification forms another disturbing aspect to what has proved a very disturbing case.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
