Tag: direct provision

Direct Provision Manager Calls Gardai on Asylum Seeker After Served With Environmental Complaint
Direct Provision

Direct Provision Manager Calls Gardai on Asylum Seeker After Served With Environmental Complaint

Mar 10, 2023 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , , , ,

Direct Provision Manager Calls Gardai on Asylum Seeker After Served With Environmental Complaint.

Breda Keane Shortt, the manager at a Direct Provision centre in Cork, called the Gardai on an asylum seeker after they served her with a complaint for a violation of the Environmental Protection Act 1992, on 06 March 2023.

The Complaint alleges “Despite several attempts to resolve the dispute with Keane Shortt, she failed to take adequate measures to remedy the situation,” which has rendered their space at night “virtually uninhabitable.” When the Complainant made attempts to hand the Complaint to Keane Shortt, she refused. The Complainant then politely asked Keane Shortt’s son, who works at the Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre, if he would accept service for her on her behalf, and he refused. When this failed, the Complainant gently placed the Complaint on Keane Shortt’s car. Keane Shortt then demanded that security remove the Complaint. When the Complainant removed the Complaint from Keane Shortt’s car, she called the Gardai. She later retaliated against the Complainant—using her authoritative position with International Protection Accommodation Service—to issue them a disciplinary notice.

Direct Provision Manager Calls Gardai on Asylum Seeker After Served With Environmental Complaint. Asylum seekers are afraid of Breda Keane.
Courtesy of the Irish Examiner

Toxic Management at Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre

A group of asylum seekers further allege Keane Shortt’s management style is toxic. A few months ago, asylum seekers gathered together to complain about the lack of parking space at Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre, and requested to have a meeting with Keane Shortt. Asylum seekers allege Keane Shortt intercepted the petition and refused to have discussion. Some of those whose names were on the petition were evicted from Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre under mysterious circumstances.

Direct Provision Manager Calls Gardai on Asylum Seeker After Served With Environmental Complaint. Other Asylum Seekers Are Afriad of Keane Shortt’s Toxic Leadership.

I interviewed a group of female asylum seekers who said, “We are afraid of her.” When asked to come forward, they said “We are afraid she will evict us. She has done it to our friends. We have children. We need to keep them safe.” Asylum seekers in the past have alleged that Keane Shortt opened private letters and shared their content with the International Protection Office.

Repatriation through coercive means is a breach of Art. 33 of the Refugee Convention. In MSS v. Belgium and Greece, the Belgian authorities engaged in coercive repatriation efforts to force the applicant back to Greece, where he lived in permanent fear of being attacked and robbed.  The ECtHR found State’s efforts amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The District Court will hear the case on 24 March 2023.

Direct Provision Case Brief - Guerra v. Ireland
Direct Provision Briefs

Direct Provision Case Brief – Guerra v. Ireland

Feb 15, 2023 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , ,

Direct Provision Case Brief – Guerra v. Ireland

Facts: Maria Guerra is a citizen of Barcelona, Spain. She is a feminist who engaged in several gender protests at Puerta del Sol square in 2021, where she carried a placard that read: “Male violence is also a pandemic.” In November 2021, three male law enforcement officers stopped Guerra while she was driving home. During the stop, they taunted Guerra for her activism. Guerra attempted to record the incident, but law enforcement officers yanked her out of the car. The law enforcement officers pinned Guerra to the pavement while each officer proceeded to sexually assault her.

Guerra fled to Ireland in 2022 and was transferred to the Baleseskin Reception Centre. While residing in Direct Provision, Guerra claims she suffered repeated acts of harassment by male asylum seekers. Guerra also claims her e-mail and website accounts were hacked into and that individuals used her real name to send false e-mails from her personal accounts. Although Guerra reported the incidents to numerous NGOs in Dublin, none took action. She also sent correspondence to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, requesting a formal meeting. However, no action was taken. The conduct transpired over a year.

Issue: Whether Ireland’s conduct rises to the level of degrading treatment and lack of respect for private life.

Rule:

Article 3

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

Article 8

“1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.”

“2.  There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

Analysis of Direct Provision Case Brief – Guerra v. Ireland

Repatriation Efforts

Guerra believes her experience in direct provision is part of Ireland’s interdiction effort to drive her back to Spain. Guerra has come to this conclusion because she has launched several complaints to authority figures that has been disregarded. It is settled law that any repatriation through coercive means is a breach of Art. 33 of the Refugee Convention. Repatriation efforts, such as the repeated hacking into an applicant’s devices to intimidate and drive them back to their country, can violate Ireland’s positive obligations to protect the applicant against the real and immediate risk of forcible transfer to Spain.

Cybercrime

In Opuz v. Turkey, hacking was defined as:

“The use of technology to gain illegal or unauthorized access to systems or resources for the purpose of acquiring personal information, altering or modifying information, or slandering and denigrating the victim. It also takes the form of violating passwords and controlling computer functions.” “Surveillance/tracking was defined as the use of technology to monitor a victim’s activities and behaviors either in real-time or historically (such as GPS tracking, or tracking keystrokes in order to recreate the victim’s computer activity).” See Opuz, no. 33401/02, §§ 72-82, ECHR 2009.

When individuals use technology to gain illegal or unauthorised access to systems or resources for the purpose of altering or modifying information and denigrating the victim, the ECtHR is likely to find a breach. In the present case, Guerra has submitted extensive documentary evidence and screenshots of changed passwords, lost e-mails, and the tracking of her keystrokes in order to recreate her computer activity. The question that must be answered is whether this conduct violates the Convention.

Guerra alleges that a man, who she once dated, is involved in the improper interception of her personal files from her laptop and e-mails. She claims Ireland dismissed the connection between her activism in Spain, the harassment in Dublin that has not been adequately addressed by officials, and the failure to take into consideration the many forms of intimidation that she had encountered while awaiting a determination on her asylum application. In Buturugă v. Romania, a cybercrime case, the ECtHR found a violation of Article 3 and Article 8 of the Convention on account of the State’s failure to fulfil its positive obligations under those provisions as it relates to cyber-harassment.

Conclusion: The ECtHR could find Ireland in violation of Article 3 and 8 of the Convention on account of its coerced repatriation efforts, and its failure to fulfil its positive obligations under those provisions.

Guerra v. Ireland is part of a series of fictional cases based on true events that have occurred in Direct Provision

Direct Provision Case Brief - Joseph v. Ireland
Direct Provision Briefs

Direct Provision Case Brief – Joseph v. Ireland

Feb 6, 2023 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , , ,

Stress Him With Stench in Direct Provision. The Case of Joseph v. Ireland.

Direct Provision Case Brief – Joseph v. Ireland

Facts: Paul Joseph is a Canadian animal rights activist who filed asylum in Ireland in 2017. The International Protection Accommodation Service transferred Joseph to the Clare Centre in 2018. One day while Joseph was on a walk, he witnessed a group of friends bludgeoning a stray dog with a tree branch. When he arrived at Clare Centre, he reported the incident to management. Management informed Joseph they could not intervene. As a result, Joseph posted a message on the community board that read “Attacking animals is cruel, inhumane and wrong. It is a serious animal rights violation. If you see attacks of cruelty on animals contact me.” During the following week, Joseph’s call-to-action was taken down from the community board.

Days later Joseph noticed a foul smell in his room. He search for the scent throughout his room but could not locate evidence of a dead carcass. The pungent smell—what smelt to Joseph like roadkill—grew stronger as the days increased and seemed to be coming from the vent within his room. On this account, Joseph called an exterminator. However, the exterminator found no carcass within the vent; he only found blood. The exterminator instructed staff to report the incident to management as soon as practicable, as the blood could potentially spread diseases such as Salmonellosis, Campylobacter and Clostridium perfringens.

The staff in direct provision took no action. The next day, Joseph aired his concerns on his animal rights blog. He also called in the exterminator for a second time, who articulated they could not take action. After he did so, he noticed the smell became more pungent. It deprived him of sleep and also triggered his asthma.

Issue: Whether the pungent smell deprives Joseph of his right to peacefully exist within his home.

Rule: Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects the right to respect for an individual’s private life, their family life, their home and their correspondence (letters, telephone calls and emails). Further, Article 1(1) of the UN Convention Against Torture (1984) defines torture as:

“any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. ”

Analysis of Joseph v. Ireland — Stress Him With Stench in Direct Provision

Article 8 ECHR

In Airey v. Ireland, the ECtHR examined Article 8 of the Convention and stated “The Convention is a living instrument, to be interpreted in the light of present-day conditions” (para. 26). The ECtHR further stated, Article 8 embraces the right to a healthy environment. This includes but is not limited to protection against pollution, nuisances caused by harmful chemicals, offensive smells, agents which precipitate respiratory ailments, noises and so on. See also, Guerra and Others v. Italy, where the Court was concerned by nuisances (smells, noise and fumes) caused by a waste-water treatment plant close to the applicant’s home, which affected her daughter’s health. 

In the present case, the Authorities did not take necessary measures to ensure the effective protection of Joseph’s home. Here, the Authorities did not provide Joseph with essential information about the risks of the smell or about emergency procedures. In Deés v. Hungary, the ECtHR recalled that the Convention protected an individual’s right, not only to the actual physical area of his home, but also to the quiet enjoyment of that area from interferences such as noise, emissions or smells. In that case, the ECtHR found a violation of Article 8 of the ECHR (right to respect for private life and home).

Article 3 ECHR

Joseph complains of insufficient sleep over several consecutive days due to the smells and being awaken at what he refers to as “odd hours of the night.” He further alleges the treatment occurred on a continuous basis— weeks before his interview with the International Protection Office. In Strelets v. Russia, the ECtHR found similar conditions to constitute inhuman and degrading treatment:

the cumulative effect of malnutrition and inadequate sleep on the days of court hearings must have been of an intensity such as to induce in the applicant physical suffering and mental fatigue. This must have been further aggravated by the fact that the above treatment occurred during the applicant’s trial, that is, when he most needed his powers of concentration and mental alertness. (para 62).

In Strelets, the ECtHR found an Article 3 violation on account of the failure of the domestic authorities to provide the applicant with adequate sleep on the days leading up to his court hearing.

Conclusion: Based on the above, the ECtHR could likely find Ireland in violation of Article 3 and 8.

If you enjoyed reading this fictional Direct Provision Case Brief – Joseph v. Ireland, which is based on true accounts, please share and like!

How to Sleep Through Anything in Direct Provision
Direct Provision

How to Sleep Through Anything in Direct Provision

Jan 22, 2023 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments ,

Do you have a noisy neighbor? Is a new development being constructed near you? Is there a smoke detector that needs a new battery or, are you dealing with an overloaded circuit breaker? Well, you’ve come to the right place. In this article, I will give you the secret on how to sleep through anything in direct provision!

Music May Help with PTSD Symptoms

While the circumstances above may prevent an individual for achieving much needed sleep, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related symptoms can prevent sleep as well. According to the American Psychiatric Association, PTSD “is characterized by three symptomatic clusters: (1) intrusive/re-experiencing symptoms, including flahbacks and nightmares, (2) avoidance symptoms (e.g., avoiding thinking about the event), and (3) hyperarousal symptoms, including insomnia symptoms and hyper-vigilance,” (Jespersen and Vuust, 2012). In the study Jespersen and Vuust (2012) conducted, between 50% and 73% of refugees had a lifetime prevalence of PTSD, compared to 1–2% in the general population. Indeed, Jespersen and Vuust (2012) found that many traumatized refugees experience symptoms consistent with a full PTSD diagnosis. They also discovered that relaxation music might help with PTSD symptoms.

How to Sleep Through Anything in Direct Provision

A few nights ago, I had difficulty falling asleep and nothing seemed to work. Listening to the humming sound of a fan was soothing and usually guided me to the REM phase. However, in my current environment, the fan was of little use and didn’t seem to help much. Then I remembered: music! How could I forget! In 12 Songs that Will Get You Through Anything in 2023, I attached a study from Donald Collins, who found that music could reduce cortisol levels. The study Collins pointed to further showed that adults who listened to both personal and neutral selections of music had significantly “reduced cortisol levels.” To be sure, in The Effect of Relaxation Music Listening on Sleep Quality in Traumatized Refugees: A Pilot Study, researchers found that listening to relaxation music at bedtime distracts the listener from stressful thoughts.

Moreover, Kate Robards found that slow, soothing music lowers the heart rate and relax the body. It also reduces anxiety, stress or, simply distract from stressful thoughts that prevent sleep.

One video that I would recommend to anyone who may be having a difficult time falling asleep is Ryan Crooper’s Sleep Talk Down, Guided Meditation Music – Sleep Faster. Crooper’s video will show you how to sleep through anything in direct provision!

Mysterious Deaths in Direct Provision: Suicide or Murder?
Opinion

Mysterious Deaths in Direct Provision: Suicide or Murder?

Jan 9, 2023 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , ,

Mysterious Deaths in Ireland’s Direct Provision: Suicide or Murder?

Asylum seekers within Ireland’s direct provision institution have died under mysterious circumstances, with the coroner’s office ruling several of these cases death by suicide. In 2022, mainstream media published an article that revealed  four asylum seekers died by suicide, while the cause of death of other asylum seekers were unknown. It is not immediately clear whether these statistics include Thomas Stofiel and Muhammad Arif Ahrar, two asylum seekers who were housed in direct provision and, allegedly died by suicide. What is clear is: these deaths are indeed puzzling.

According to Malekmian, Arif was residing in the city of Monaghan in an emergency direct provision centre. Asylum seekers in that centre described Arif as an “intelligent and educated” man. While no scientific evidence shows a correlation between intelligence and levelheadedness, there seems to be an association between education and dissidence. If so, it may be the case that Arif fell under the class of dissident asylum seekers—those who are less likely to obey Milgramesque directives meted out by authority.

First, let’s consider the facts. Malekmian discovered that “those close to Arif were fearful of his mental health” and “urged him to go to the doctor” before his death. However, Abolish Direct Provision alleges that Arif had sent several e-mails to the International Protection Accommodation Service requesting to be transferred. If Arif had close connections to people in the Monaghan centre, how do you explain the copious requests for a transfer?

It could be that Arif’s request for a transfer was grounded on the idea that other cities offered better employment opportunities. A request to transfer in order to gain better access to employment is motive for life, is it not? Indeed, access to employment is undoubtedly an alibi for Arif, given employment is a requisite for most asylum seekers who have a responsibility to financially assist their families in their home countries. This raises another question: if Arif sought to assist his family back in Afghanistan, suicide would thwart this very goal, would it not?

Suicidal Disclaimer
Courtesy of Journey to the Center

Mysterious Deaths in Ireland’s Direct Provision: Suicide or Murder? If Murder, How Long Will They Get Away With It?

It may be that Arif’s transfer had little to do with employment and more to do with behaviour within the Monaghan centre itself. In Out of the Miqlaatun into the Fire, I describe the parlous state of encountering a post-Wahhabistic form of social control by so-called asylum morality police—a faction of male asylum seekers in Direct Provision, and how Islam was the driving force.

But Arif was Muslim, wasn’t he? Arif’s status as a Muslim is a plausible rebuttable to the phenomenon, in light of the fact that he would have obeyed the tenets of Islam. Building on this argument, it is quite possible that Arif would not have come to the attention of them. Further, research seems to indicate that “…asylum seekers may face unique risk factors for mental disorder before, during, and after their migration leading to suicidality.” While this may be true, the article cited asserts “the lack of early and thorough exploration of suicidal intent in this population requires large-scale quantitative studies to evaluate the effectiveness and feasibility of current practices in mental-health care and suicide prevention.” In other words, it is difficult to determine what may lead to an asylum seeker’s suicidality.

If research does not support the suicidal argument, could it be that we are all ignoring a common cause? Is it within the realm of possibility that another faction of asylum seekers like those mentioned in Out of the Miqlaatun into the Fire, bullied Arif to suicide? If we factor in Arif’s intelligence and education, and its connection with dissidence, are we looking at another protest psychosis incident? It is plausible that the political abuse of psychiatry, as experienced by my confidential source, may have variations to fit the individual profile of specific asylum applicants.

If so, does this point to intentional murder? The phases drafted in Dominant Woman were preliminary and mirrored the direct behaviour of men in direct provision. As far as we know, Arif was not a member of the LGBTQ community. If not LGBTQ, then it is unlikely male asylum seekers would have exposed Arif to similar phases. Moreover, Dominant Woman was silently condemned by several NGOs and politicians in Ireland, and lacked the imprimatur given to the asylum morality police. If the protest psychosis was the cause, and it has variations, how long will it be before they use it on someone else? Better yet, will it result in someone’s death?

Ireland's Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry
Direct Provision

Ireland’s Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry

Dec 29, 2022 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , , , ,

A years long investigation into the intimidation of particular asylum seekers in the direct provision system reveal Ireland’s Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry.

How We Investigated Ireland’s Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry

You feel like you’ve found your calling. Whether you received it in a dream; while gazing up at a billboard or, after consulting a high power in prayer—you have chosen this calling to give your life a deeper meaning. A sense of purpose. For many people across the world this calling is: activism. Activists often turn to ideological support—the good of grassroot movements—while standing their ground. Brow-beating, intimidation, profiling and arrests are the bad of activism when one speaks truth to power.  The question of security is undoubtedly the ugly and worrisome slice of politicking, especially when safety cannot be guaranteed. Indeed, the unsettling feeling of not being safe may compel one to flee their country. But will sanctuary find them in the country they land?

“Activism crept its way back up and now I am at it again,” says a confidential source residing in direct provision, who will be referred to as “John Doe.” “Even though I know who they are; I can point to the asylum seekers, no one will listen,” says Doe, who believes its his past social wrongs that have persuaded refugee advocate services and NGOs to ignore his plight. Doe claims authority have used asylum seekers to intimidate and to force him out of the international protection system. “I stand up for myself in protest and I am labelled chaotic. Called paranoid,” says Doe. If this sounds eerily familiar you’re not mistaken.

How Ireland’s Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry

The Irish Examiner published an article on an American asylum seeker named Thomas Stofiel, who mysteriously died in 2020. Imad, who the Irish Examiner interviewed, alleged that he had spoken to Stofiel. Imad also alleges Stofiel and another American asylum seeker had “the same problem, like mental.”

There is another source in Noel Barker’s article who reinforces the “mental” stereotype about American asylum seekers, “…if you are paranoid about the U.S., you are going to have real fear for your data being used by anyone, anywhere…” says the CEO of a refugee advocate service in Cork. There seems to be a trend, as the International Protection Tribunal archive reveals 2 other cases of American asylum seekers that were alleged to be overly suspicious of the government. Are their suspicions illegitimate or is it something else?

The Protest Psychosis
Courtesy of Journey to the Center

The CEO in the article gratuitously assesses the state of mind of American asylum seekers from afar, rather than exploring a third event that is defensibly the cause. In Torture and Psychiatric Abuse: Definition, Ethics, and Assessment, Ryan C.W. Hall and Richard C.W. Hall states psychiatric abuse may consist of an intentional misdiagnosis to discredit an individual, imprison them or, to cause their unemployment and loss of specific rights. An intentional misdiagnosis may also be to protect others (i.e., individuals in power). This quote appeared in Chapter 9 of Principles and Practice of Forensic Psychiatry (2017, p. 846).

As early as the 1920s, governments have pilloried activism and political demonstrations as—not a rights issue—but a mental health issue. To illustrate this point, one need only refer to Aurora D’Angelo, who participated in a rally in support of Sacco and Vanzetti, and was sent to a mental health facility for psychiatric evaluation.

Jonathan M. Metzl calls this psychiatry abuse “protest psychosis.” In The Protest Psychosis: How Schizophrenia Became a Black Disease (2011), Metzl draws a connection between the discriminatory perceptions of schizophrenia as a disease prone to Black men and women, and the continued pathologisation of them within systems that relies on language that has been shown to oppress.

Read More: 9 Americans Granted Refugee Status

U.S. officials’ harassment of activists on account of their political views have been widely documented over the years. In the 1950s, declassified documents revealed the FBI diagnosed Malcolm X with “pre-psychotic paranoid schizophrenia,” and “membership of the Communist Party.” Metzl contends in the early 1960s, the same agency diagnosed Robert Williams, the head of the North Carolina NAACP as having two minds—“armed, and dangerous during his flight from trumped-up kidnapping charges.” Doe unequivocally believes psychiatry from afar is being deployed in direct provision by “those in power” to undermine the claims of individuals fleeing countries Ireland perceives as safe.

Abuse of Psychiatry
Courtesy of Journey to the Center

A question often raised among proponents and dissidents in international refugee law is: who can be considered a refugee? Refugees with a nationality are defined by the UNHCR as a “person who is outside the country because they have—or had—a well-founded fear of persecution by reason of her race, political opinion, nationality or religion.” The individual may also be unable to avail themselves of the protection of the government because of fear. From examining the UNHCR’s definition, it appears that any person, including someone from a democracy can become a refugee.

The Eradication of the Principle of Confidentiality

When countries acquire information on an applicant’s country of origin, they are bound by the principle of confidentiality. In other words, they cannot disclose information regarding the applicant to the actors of persecution or serious harm. Yet, Doe believes officials are using a combination of its diplomatic relations and the protest psychosis to undermine his asylum claim. “Look at what they did to Edward Snowden,” says Doe.

Snowden applied for political asylum in 21 countries and asserted the U.S. administration and President Joe Biden had pressured governments to refuse his asylum petitions. Biden had also telephoned President Rafael Correa days prior to Snowden’s remarks, asking the Ecuadorian leader not to grant him asylum. France, Poland, Brazil, Germany and India were countries that also rejected Snowden’s application outright. The influence countries like the U.S. wields in the international arena underpins the position that Ireland is likely allowing its diplomatic relations to influence how it decides cases from applicants who have fled western countries.

How the Protest Psychosis is Being Used in Ireland to Undermine Asylum Claims

Doe reaffirms the susceptible followers of this protest psychosis are “asylum seekers” and that each can “be identified.” Art Padilla, the author of Leadership: Leaders, Followers, and Environments (2012), echoes the sentiment that susceptible followers either acquiesce without resistance or align themselves with toxic leaders.

From reviewing Doe’s statements and observations, the protest psychosis is clearly a strategy to intimidate asylum seekers who have fled democracies into “abandoning our asylum claim and voluntarily returning home,” says Doe confidently. Asylum seekers who are poor, worried, and living in fear of deportation seem to be much easier for authority to control and manipulate into undertaking its political abuse of psychiatry. Indeed, the fear of deportation is a persuasive and logical reason, as it explains how asylum seekers help toxic leaders establish the protest psychosis of those applicants Ireland wishes to reject.

When Protest Psychosis Conformers Turn Into Colluders

Doe further asserts “refugee advocate services” conform to the protest psychosis by remaining non-active. If the refugee agency confronts the wrongs happening to asylum applicants, as in Doe’s case, the toxic leaders are likely to withhold funding from the NGO.

Impressionable conformers, as stated by Padilla, may become colluders when they internalize a toxic leader’s vision by committing to their destructive enterprise. This is accomplished when NGOs assist toxic leaders in violating international refugee law. Financial incentives are another reason why NGOs may collude with destructive leaders in violating its positive and negative obligations under international law.

It is believed the asylum seekers who were—and may still be—involved in the implementation of the protest-psychosis-like scheme allegedly contributed to Stofiel’s death by engaging in these exploitative relations. “No one without power can do what they have done. Their support and encouragement are to advance their personal agendas,” says Doe.

It cannot be denied that NGOs, solicitors, media organisations and asylum seekers have beliefs consistent with the idea that individuals from democratic regimes have no legitimate reason for claiming asylum. This leads one to believe these conformers are assisting toxic leaders in diagnosing particular asylum seekers without an official psychiatric evaluation. When asked, “Who did you tell about this?” Doe said, “Everyone. They just said I’m paranoid.”

The overly suspicious phenomenon raises a broader question as to whether the International Protection Office or a country’s diplomatic servants, are appointing psychiatrists to unethically diagnose particular asylum seekers in direct provision for their justified remonstrances.

Martha Beall Mitchell, the wife of U.S. Attorney General John Mitchell, experienced the political abuse of psychiatry first hand. In the 1970s, a practitioner diagnosed Mitchell with a paranoid mental disorder after she claimed that the administration of President Richard M. Nixon was engaged in illegal activities. The “Martha Mitchell effect” was coined to describe mental health misdiagnoses when accurate claims are dismissed as delusional. Indeed, many of her claims were later proved correct.

Evidence further indicates an overemphasis of psychotic symptoms in marginalised groups, especially Black Americans, as compared with other racial or ethnic groups. This was revealed in a study that looked at 599 Blacks and 1,058 non-Latino whites. Clinicians failed to effectively weigh mood symptoms when diagnosing schizophrenia among Black Americans, suggesting that racial bias, whether conscious or subconscious, is one factor in the diagnosis of schizophrenia in this population. The study also supports extensive previous research done by Stephen Strakowski of Dell Medical School on how overemphasis of psychotic symptoms in Blacks can contribute to misdiagnosis of schizophrenia spectrum disorders.

According to the American Psychiatric Association, it is unethical to diagnose an individual from afar. The Goldwater Rule is a statement of ethics that enjoins psychiatrists from professionally diagnosing someone they have not personally evaluated. If the Goldwater Rule proscribes psychiatrists from diagnosing someone they have not personally evaluated, then it stands to reason that asylum seekers, who have no medical license, have no epistemic footing when it comes to psychiatric diagnoses.  Principle 3 of the Psychology Association of Ireland further states “psychologists are required to act in a trustworthy, reputable, and accountable manner towards clients and the community. They shall avoid doing harm to clients and research participants, and act to prevent harm caused by others. They shall ensure that those whom they supervise act ethically.”

A Freedom of Information request was emailed to the International Protection Office in September 2022. It gave no response. The Department of Foreign Affairs in Ireland also issued no statement.

Comments regarding Ireland’s Activists Deportations Find Approval in Political Abuse Psychiatry should be addressed here.

Fact Check: Higher Approvals for LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists?
Fact Check

Fact Check: Higher Approvals for LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists?

Dec 22, 2022 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , , , ,

Fact Check: Higher Approvals for LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists? On 21 December 2022 Beryl Ohas published an article in GCN News claiming LGBTQ+ activists have it easier in the international protection process. Is it true? Before I get to the answer, I want to say that I empathise with Ohas and at no time discount her experiences as an LGBTQ+ person navigating the asylum process.

Fact Check: Higher Approvals for LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists? No, LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists Are Not Approved at a Higher Rate

Ohas claims in The truth about being granted refugee status as an LGBTQ+ person in Ireland, that International Protection “protocols only favour activists, or educated and successful LGBTQ+ refugees.”

First, asylum protocols do not favour activists or educated and successful LGBTQ+ refugees in Ireland. In fact, protocols are more likely to disfavour them on the grounds that it is believed that “the more knowledgeable” the asylum seeker, the easier it is for them to create an asylum-friendly scenario, which the International Protection Office may believe to be superficially compatible with the conditions known to exist in the country of origin. To illustrate this point one only need to refer to the case of Bulelani Mfaco, a well-known activist in Ireland, who has been vocal about homophobia and attacks in South Africa, but still had his asylum application rejected in 2019. Danni Askini, an American trans activist who sought asylum in Sweden also had her claim rejected. This clearly demonstrates LGBTQ+ activists are not approved at a higher rate.

Quianna Canada's Sup-advocacy

While I concede, one could be a climate change activist but know little about climate change, activists usually advocate for—or against—an issue because they know much about it, or have lived experience with that issue. What Ohas seems to omit from her article is that there have been cases of heterosexual asylum seekers using the LGBTQ+ ground to get asylum. Indeed, evidence demonstrated that hundreds of asylum seekers lied about sexual orientation just to be granted asylum in the Netherlands.

Another truth omitted from Ohas’ article is that LGBTQ+ persons who come from ‘safe countries’ are regularly denied Refugee Status despite meeting the definition. This practice is at odds with the European Parliament’s resolution, who pointed out that LGBTQ+ people can be subjected to abuse in countries held to be ‘safe’ for asylum determination and may have entirely legitimate claims.

LGBTQ+ Asylum Seekers in Ireland From Islam Can Fully Be Themselves

While I agree with Ohas, less popular, antisocial and introverted LGBTQ+ individuals regularly experience discrimination, the claim that LGBTQ+ Muslims cannot be themselves in Ireland is misleading. This argument forces Ireland to shoulder the burden, when in fact the burden belongs on the shoulders of the Islamic community. First, ‘Muslim’ is not a country or continent. Muslims are people who adhere to the Islamic religion. Second, I haven’t found a law on the books in Ireland that requires LGBTQ+ asylum seekers to be part of the Islamic community. Indeed, the ECtHR explicitly held that Sharīaʿ law is not compatible with the European Convention of Human Rights. The explicit ruling of the ECtHR and the fact that Muslims are people who adhere to the Islamic religion leads one to believe that LGBTQ+ asylum seekers who identify as Muslim are likely adhering to Islam.

Most LGBTQ+ persons who are persecuted in Islam would not purposely re-associate themselves with the religion in Ireland because they understand that a hard line may be drawn between sexuality and spirituality. Indeed, a gay Muslim who attended a mosque in Ireland found out the hard way when a Sheikh forbade his lifestyle. The admonishment to his gay lifestyle also resulted in the man abandoning the Irish Muslim Council when he found himself without anywhere to pray for fear of judgement. He also told the Irish Mirror he’s now questioning whether he’s welcome among Muslims at all. As can be seen, it is not Ireland that is preventing LGBTQ+ asylum seekers from fully being themselves.

No, LGBTQ+ Asylum Seekers Do Not Have to Celebrate Pride

Pride celebration is not required in order to receive a Refugee Declaration. Article 10 of the Irish Constitution states everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This means that public authorities in Ireland cannot require LGBTQ+ asylum seekers to celebrate Pride. Several high profile LGBTQ individuals in western countries, such as Blair White and Lewis Oakley, do not necessarily celebrate Pride month. In addition to these voices, Ally Hills uploaded a video in 2021 Reacting to Gays Who Hate Pride. If LGBTQ+ citizens do not have to celebrate Pride, then it follows that LGBTQ+ asylum seekers do not have to celebrate it just to get a Refugee Status Declaration.

Intrusive Questioning of LGB Asylum Seekers Have Changed

While there have been cases where gay asylum seekers have been asked intrusive questions in visa interviews, most International Protection officers generally avoid intrusive questions. Intrusive tests, the submission of intimate evidence, and questioning about sexual practices are explicitly prohibited as they infringe on a person’s rights under the EU Charter. We know this if we look at C-473/16 F v. Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal, where the CJEU clarified which evidence is permitted in assessing asylum claims based on sexual orientation. The CJEU’s judgment in A.B.C. v. Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie also delineates what cannot be asked, as well as what the decision maker is not able to receive as evidence in sexual orientation cases. As noted above, both cases demonstrate the changes being made in the International Protection process as it relates to intrusive questions.

No, There is No ‘Imaging’ of LGBTQ+ Persons in Western Countries

Ohas argues that “the use of stereotypical western imaging of LGBTQ+ sex, expressions of identity through rainbow-coded fashion styles is the framework within which ‘truth’ is legitimised and validated.” However, this could not be further from the truth. The rainbow flag is a symbol of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) pride and LGBT social movements. The colors reflect the diversity of the LGBT community and the spectrum of human sexuality and gender. In other words, there are many shades of gray as it relates to human sexuality and gender. If there are many shades of gray in western society when it comes to gender and sexuality, then we cannot possibly accept the argument that there is a western imaging conspiracy being used to deny LGBTQ+ applicants.

It is Widely Understood that Asylum Seekers Miss Their Families

It is widely understood that asylum seekers miss their families. Candi McDow states “When you miss someone it means you really care about the person and you value them.” You wouldn’t be human if you didn’t miss your loved ones or certain aspects of your nation. For example, I miss Cream of Wheat and cannot find it anywhere in Ireland. I don’t think anyone would say, “Oh, you miss Cream of Wheat? Then you must not be persecuted!” Or, “You miss your family? People who miss their family are not persecuted!” People understand persecution in different ways. I think the best way to educate someone on persecution, without revealing intimate details about oneself, is to talk about it.

Where Ohas Gets it Right: Direct Provision

In the midst of misinformation Ohas does get it right on direct provision. Some asylum seekers in Ireland do have to share room with homophobic people, which promotes bullying and discrimination. While I disagree with Ohas that heterosexual refugees are highly homophobic and transphobic, there is an argument to be made that the myopic mindset could be the result of religious dogma, which emboldens an individual’s unwillingness to integrate to create a safe space for everyone.

To read more articles like Fact Check: Higher Approvals for LGBTQ+ Asylum Activists?, be sure to write me.

The Ugly Truth Behind My Direct Provision Research Paper
Direct Provision

The Ugly Truth Behind My Direct Provision Research Paper

Nov 23, 2022 by Quianna Canada 0 Comments , , ,

Misogyny. Self-Preservation. A Whirlwind Romance. What Asylum Advocates Refuse to Accept

Look at what she did! She is a big problem! Are you seeing this! Get her out! If you took a glance at Dominant Woman: The Effects of Masculine Energy on Male Romantic Partners, you might utter these statements too. One can only imagine what the asylum seekers at Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre, who appropriated this preliminary investigation from my computer, voiced to a legion of refugee advocate services and politicians in Ireland to fit their narrative. Most asylum advocates do not understand that there is an ugly truth behind my direct provision research paper. This paper tells you what. It also answers why.

Before I delve into the idea behind Dominant Woman, and how it led to Out of the Miqlaatun into the Fire: the Shariazation of Ireland’s Direct Provision Institution and its Impact on Transgender Asylum Seekers, I need to issue a disclaimer. I am not on the left, nor am I on the right. Further, this article is not intended to incite violence against immigrant men, nor is this a call-to-action to anti-immigrant groups to mete out hate against any immigrant men in direct provision, as I explicitly condemn the use of hate and violence to remedy any issue.

Next, it is expected that my opponents will, either now, or sometime in the future, circulate images of my having a conversation with pro-Irish advocates a few weeks ago. They may even spin that conversation into a macabre encounter. However, much respect is given to the pro-Irish men who challenged me on my worldview, articulated their perspective, and did not make outlandish assumptions about who I really am (at least, not to my face), and vice versa.

Why Dominant Woman Happened – The Ugly Truth Behind My Direct Provision Research Paper

Dominant woman happened because there was abusive behaviour against women and LGBT asylum seekers when I arrived at the Balseskin Reception Centre (“BRC”). BRC, in the earlier stages, was like being inside the Big Brother house. It was coed and communal living, which is quite different from residing in a shelter or an apartment. Indeed, if one wink twice, direct provision could have been mistaken for a college dormitory. I had never lived on one. Thus, my intention was to remove the gravity and distress out of the experience by treating it as a dormitory. But this would change after I found myself constantly being mistreated for being too altruistic. Indeed, I was pathologically altruistic. This is not an indication that I am infallible, or that I have never made mistakes. Indeed, I uploaded a list of foolish things I have done in my life. Nonetheless, this is a true reflection of what I observed happening while living in that particular centre.

As I discuss in my research paper, asylum seekers in Direct Provision are thought to share a common immigrational and parallel experience. From this detail, it could be said that members of the LGBT community enter Direct Provision under the blind assumption that it is an environment where one can create an empirical bond with the community. Even more so for persecuted members of the community. It first appeared as if one could create an empirical bond there. For instance, male asylum seekers would approach me and asked me to teach them English. But I soon learned this was a code name for sex. It cannot be denied that the need for closeness and sexual intimacy is a naturalistic need of human existence. However, when men in direct provision feign to befriend you, feign to accept you, and feign to love women and LGBT persons in order to extort money, obtain a Refugee Declaration (which often happens), and gain absolute power, this undoubtedly led to the ugly truth behind my direct provision research paper.

My opponents will argue that I have a checkered past, never been honest about who ‘they believe I really am’, and that I have taken shortcuts in my personal life that go beyond what is unethical and immoral. Indeed, the same argument can be shifted back to them:

1. Many men in direct provision do not tell women or LGBT individuals they are married. While infidelity happens all the time (not pot calling the kettle black here), men cannot hide this vital detail and cry foul when others do the same.

2. Many men in direct provision use the LGBT ground to gain asylum when they are not LGBT, and

3. Some, not all, cannot be identified because some come from third-world countries that do not have comprehensive database.

On reflection, it seems more accurate to say that no one in direct provision should point the finger at someone for unethical or immoral behaviour. The truth of the matter is that I tried to enter direct provision with an open mind and to see the good in everyone. However, it was clear most male asylum seekers did not. In reality, many still do not. For instance, those that I protect in my research were often called a Bit**! Slu*! Wh***!” I speak from first-hand knowledge. It happened to a Canadian female asylum seeker who had to post a sign on her door that instructed, “No S**! No Marriage!” The mistreatment became so uncomfortable that I donned a hijab just to gain some respect. A Palestinian woman, “Siba”, who tried to free herself from the hijab at Balseskin was coerced back into it after being called a b*t!h. Moreover, my Pakistani comrade, “Mithra,” also put their gender expression back on the top shelf out of the fear of being policed on moral grounds. What also brought me to the ground is when I watched, with my own eyes, my Nigerian friend, “Memory”, fall into a s** scam. Watched her fragment into pieces. An email is welcomed from any NGO, organisation or politician who thinks any of the victims mentioned here are a figment of the imagination. A discussion with all the victims at the table is also welcomed. I was too protective of Siba, Mithra, and Memory.

The most interesting thing about Out of the Miqlaatun into the Fire is not one person asked me why? They had every opportunity. For example, I posted a debate on the community board at Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre welcoming any asylum seeker to a respectful debate of their choosing. No one accepted the offer. Not once. Refugee advocate services and other organisations had space to ask why, but declined to, as they had already made up their mind. Look at what she did! She is a big problem! Are you seeing this! Get her out!

Not once did any of these organisations, including organisations of my own ethnicity ask the question: why? What is the reason behind your behaviour? The asylum seekers who stole the paper had a template in front of them. A critical view of the template clearly showed it was incomplete. So why didn’t anyone ask: why? Maybe these organisations felt they would have gotten a dishonest answer in return. Or, they didn’t want to hear the truth—what so many people have been saying for years. Hearing it come from me, someone who has been branded with the Scarlett letter sounded unbelievable. Or, it sounded too believable and was too real to consider. The answer to why is: a role of dominance had been thrusted upon us for so long by men in direct provision. The why was to feel safe again. The why, initially of course, was to wear the skin of men. The why was so that dominance would feel familiar to men. That is why. Bit*h, wh*re, sl*t was born out of submissiveness. Submission in direct provision could break you. It definitely broke me. To be sure, in 2019, The Journal published a story about Aisha, a woman living in direct provision, who was repeatedly harassed and propositioned by other asylum-seekers. So, why didn’t men in direct provision have to carry this baby to term? At least, for once?

Instead of asking why, authority figures condoned a community placing me on an island. It also condoned the taking of my personal property, the ostracism, the harassment, the uploading my personal information to the internet, the making me feel like the devil, the fake friendships, and the disingenuous relationships that would go to undermine my full potential. It was all condoned. I cannot help but wonder if it was being done to protect a Middle Eastern man at BRC, who seemed to gain nearly 1,000 protectors in the flesh. As he told me once before, most people will believe him over me because he comes from a war-torn country. Today, his words remain true.

The Middle Eastern man would eventually ask me for my number. My initial response was “no.” But I knew what my friends would say, “live a little! Don’t be too up tight! Have fun! You only live once!” You have one life. Just one life. So, I gave the Middle Eastern man my number. He was reserved and knew very little English. Our mode of communication was via Google translate. After he discovered MASI was donating computers to asylum seekers, I wrote a letter on his behalf so that he could communicate with his family.

During one of our conversations, he disclosed to me that he cheated on previous partners. Although he was inconsistent at times, enjoyed being first—always—played cat-and-mouse games, played hard-to-get, was non-committal, and had a superficial view towards women, I had a lot of respect for him. It was after he disclosed that he cheated on women to me. He showed me a glimpse of the truth through the sliver of his conceitedness. Most men wouldn’t have admitted to being a cheater. Here was some truth. It meant something to me, even if it meant little to anyone else. Over the weeks the Middle Eastern man created an environment of uncertainty. So, in return, I created an environment of uncertainty too. I had this grand idea of unfairly accusing him of having sexual intercourse, whether I had the evidence or not. Indeed, several of the men in direct provision, including him, had unfairly accused women of being who*es and sl*ts based on what they wore, whether they had the evidence or not. In hindsight, such an accusation would have given him an ego boost. It was a grant of power. So, I gave him power in the submissive phase. When he pulled back, I pulled back. I ignored him when I saw him in the courtyard on the withdrawal phase. Whether anyone wants to believe it or not, this is the ugly truth behind my direct provision research paper. This prompted a text with an apology, “and remember that you are the first friend.” He was negotiating his way around my firewalls. He was decoding me. He had torn down the barriers I had tried to build through the Dominant Woman. The fact that he saw me as a friend struck a chord. It was at this very moment I made the decision to disclose Dominant Woman to him. Then, I disclosed it to the others.

The Middle Eastern man and I would eventually transfer to different accommodation centres, which left me heartbroken. I did my best to avoid him on the day of transfer, so as to keep from crying. It was happening again, another separation. However, what the asylum seekers at Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre, and their powerful contacts continue to conceal is: I truly loved the Middle Eastern man. I had loved others before him. I even had love for a security guard, ‘Maurice O’Sullivan,’ at the Kinsale Road Accommodation Centre who I had little in common with but mindfulness. This wasn’t romantic love. It was based on friendship and mutual interest. Nonetheless, I needed to remember to “Love yourself.” In order to end the pain, I must “love myself.” Indeed, a wise asylum seeker instructed me to “put all your love in yourself.” That was the most profound advice anyone has ever given me in my life. It cannot be denied that I lived a pretty questionable life. But when I love someone, I love them. Now, I had to love myself.

Referring back to the Middle Eastern man: I got a call in 2021. The Middle Eastern man said that he really missed me. He asked if I wanted to be his girlfriend and, if I wanted to move in with him. I didn’t hesitate. It was like a marriage proposal. “Yes!” I told him. In the background, logical people cautioned, “you’re moving too fast!” They also said, “shouldn’t you know more about him before you move in with him?” But, you only live once! I had always wanted to live a domesticated life and the Middle Eastern man was giving me that opportunity. Carpe diem!

The Middle Eastern man had attempted to move on his own to Dublin, but the International Protection Accommodation Service (“IPAS”) declined his transfer. He then asked if I could get us moved. He knew I had a bit of experience in technical writing, as it was my technical writing that resulted in his laptop. So, I corresponded with IPAS, on several occasions, until they relocated us. IPAS eventually moved us together.

After 30 days, we both petitioned IPAS to move to different centres due to serious irreconcilable differences in the home, what everyone knew would happen. The Middle Eastern man and I included. Maybe it was all part of their plan. At any rate, he and I both made some dumb mistakes. However, I am the only one with 1,000+ people planning my demise and seeing to it that I fail. We cannot deny that a why could have been the key that answered so many questions. However, I do not believe my actions warranted placing me on an island, gaslighting me, stealing my USB, stealing my personal post, engaging in continued harassment, the uploading my personal information to the internet, the making me feel like the devil, the fake friendships and relationships that evaporated in a sky of disingenuity, or the treating me like a non-human being by organisations that could not muster the word why. That’s the ugly truth behind my direct provision research paper.

Skip to content