McDowell can’t ignore the human cost of his stance

POLITICS’ most outlandish improbabilities. George W Bush admitting that he was wrong about the Iraq war.

Gerry Adams admitting that he was wrong about the IRA and the Northern Bank robbery.

And Michael McDowell admitting that he was wrong about anything.

But lo and behold, one of those unlikely scenarios came to pass. Sometime between late Tuesday night and yesterday morning the Justice Minister applied the brakes to the unstoppable juggernaut of his rhetoric to have a look at the road sign and discovered it read ‘Damascus’.

When the minister stood up on Tuesday night to debate the case of Olunkunle Elunkanlo, the young Nigerian deported to Lagos on March 14, what struck those who watched the speech was not so much what he said but the unremittingly harsh tone.

But yesterday there was a volte face, not only in substance but also in tone. The decision, he conceded, was wrong. “It was a little too harsh as a decision in the way it fell out... The best thing to do in the circumstances is to stop digging.”

And what a trench he had already dug for himself. Twice, on Monday and Tuesday, he had dismissed all criticisms of the decision with his trademark air of omniscience.

On both days, he also nit-picked. He took issue with the account given by Elunkanlo of his age, and questioned the narrative that he had been deported while still wearing his school uniform.

Referring to reports that Elunkanlo was 19, the minister said that at the time of his initial application three years ago, he himself stated he was 17.

“On the basis of that date he was by no stretch of the imagination a schoolboy but was 20 years of age when he was deported. Moreover, he verbally indicated to the escorting garda team that he was, in fact, 21.”

The student himself admitted on radio that he is 20 but the minister’s use of anecdotal evidence from a garda gave the strong impression that here was, in fact, another Nigerian adult chancing his arm on the back of a claim that was manifestly unfounded.

The school uniform issue was, at best, a moot point in the debate. But the minister twice challenged Elunkanlo’s account.

All very well. But if he wasn’t wearing his school uniform and didn’t collect his belongings, how was it that the photograph taken of him in Lagos clearly showed him wearing his school uniform?

The only explanation so far is that his tracksuit top may have obscured the school jumper.

Ireland’s immigration laws would probably be considered relatively liberal in a European context. But that is against a background where governments and political parties throughout Europe have ratcheted up the debate invoking fears that the countries will be swamped by hordes of spongers from the developing world.

Here, it’s a little different.

We can’t be seen as lax otherwise we’ll find ourselves victims of the ‘pull factor’.

Logically, it’s hard to argue with the fact that the tougher immigration laws here have worked. The number of asylum seekers has fallen.

The process has been streamlined. Nobody can contend that deportations should not take place. Nor does anyone advocate an open door policy. And it is indubitable that the asylum process is abused by some, perhaps many of those who seek it.

But the principles of law enunciated by the Justice Minister take no account of the human element.

Many of those who have come have been living here for years, have become integrated in their communities.

And the argument that those who make false asylum claims jump the queue has a fatal flaw. For if you come from Nigeria or from any other sub-Saharan African country, there is no queue. You have next to no chance of getting into Ireland on a work permit.

Bertie Ahern last week raised the issue of undocumented Irish in the US with George W Bush. But here the undocumented Nigerian has no opportunity of ‘green card’ status other than going down the refugee route.

As to the minister’s motives in changing his mind, a fair smattering of politicians to whom I spoke were unconvinced.

Given the insistence and indignation of McDowell in the Dáil on Tuesday, they said privately that the about-turn was cynical, a move designed to cut off the posse at the pass.

However, you have to take his contrite concession at face value. Perhaps the more caring and sharing minister might be minded to change his mind once more and review our immigration system. It can still be tough. But it also needs to be a little fairer.