'A week ago we were safe in Ireland': Family at centre of Red Cow deportation speak out
A NIGERIAN FAMILY whose deportation case was highlighted by a Dublin school principal last week have spoken out about the conditions they have faced since they were removed from Ireland.
Oluwanifemi Winfunke said the past week had been a 'nightmare' for him, his wife and three children.
'It is distressing and heartbreaking that a week ago my wife and children were safe in Ireland,' he told
The Journal
.
The former banker said his family had come to Ireland seeking refuge from the 'scar of the past' brought by kidnapping incidents, 'hoping for a safe haven before this illegal deportation brought us back into what we feared most'.
Five children and thirty adults
were removed from Ireland
on a chartered flight last week as part of the Department of Justice's crackdown on enforcing immigration rules.
Outcry over the family's removal
was led by Ciarán Cronin, the principal of St James Primary school in Dublin 8 – he told
The Journal
that two of the children who were removed from the state had been pupils at his school had made themselves part 'of our school fabric, part of our school lives', during their three years in Ireland.
Children who were friends with the three Winfunke kids told
The Journal
last week of their devastation at realising their peers were being deported, and of their fear over what it meant for their own family. The hotel is part of the international protection system.
St James Primary school in Dublin 8
Google Streetview
Google Streetview
After his family were brought from the Red Cow Hotel on the outskirts of Dublin to the Nigerian capital Lagos last week, Winfunke said they have been 'huddled together in a cramped, dilapidated room' as they try to find their footing.
'My family are crying at the moment, they are scared of where we are,' Winfunke told
The Journal
, adding that gun shots were heard near where they are staying earlier this week.
Advertisement
They arrived in January 2022, with Winfunke working full-time in Dublin over recent years.
Outlining the family's reasons for leaving Nigeria, Winfunke said that they were living comfortably before two kidnappings incidents.
'I was abused, tortured, and traumatised during these times. We were recovering from these scars of the past kidnappings that happened to me, which my wife also suffered a lot during this time,' he said.
'My daughter was also targeted. We had settled in Ireland seeking refuge from the scar of the past, hoping for a safe haven before this illegal deportation brought us back into what we feared most.'
He added: 'We have been rendered homeless once again by the Justice Minister after all the pleas from our loved ones in Ireland who see all the effort we have put in since.'
Experiences of deportees
The family are just one of several people subjected to last week's deportations who spoke to
The Journal
about their experiences.
Many of the men who were deported on last week's flight had been arrested a number of weeks ahead of the chartered flight.
Several described how they were brought weeks in advance of the plane journey to Cloverhill Prison in Dublin, where some slept on mattresses on the floor due to overcrowding.
Winfunke said it was an alien experience for many of the men, as they were separated from their families and friends ahead of the deportation.
A number of the deportees said they were repeatedly offered drugs in prison but refused – one alleged he was beaten by a fellow prisoner as a result.
Several of the people who spoke to
The Journal
said they arrested by gardaí after turning up to a routine appointment with immigration officials.
'We're not criminals, you gave us an appointment. I was given a time, I went there, and I got picked up,' said one man who had been residing in Ireland since 2009. 'We go to the appointments because we're not criminals.'
Related Reads
Minister to bring forward plans to purchase Dublin's Citywest Hotel
Gary Gannon: Fear is what drives immigration protests in neglected communities, not hatred
Anti-immigration picket over refugee accommodation sparks tensions in Dublin's Liberties
The appointments are similar to bail or dole sign-ons and take place regularly while a person is seeking permission to remain in Ireland.
When asked why they were refused permission to remain in Ireland, a number of the men quoted the phrase, 'the interest of the state is more than individual interest' as the reasoning given to them by immigration officials. Others said they were told that it was 'the minister's decision' and that their deportation would need to take place as a result.
Emergency stop on last week's flight
Three of the men on the Zoom call with
The Journal
raised concerns over the welfare of one of their friends on last week's flight.
The flight made an emergency stop after two passengers became unwell on board, and one was brought by medical personnel to the hospital after landing in Nigeria.
Today, the deportees said they have not been able to track down their friend and don't know where he ended up. 'We are concerned for him, we have tried different contacts and can't find him.'
A number said that Nigeria was 'not safe' for them, telling of persistent threats against them and their family. One man immediately went on the run and fled to nearby Ghana after his deportation last week.
Another man, who had been working as a team leader in a food factory in Dublin, said he had been unable to trace his parents since returning.
He said they face persecution by a Jihadist group, which, as recently this week, has been subject to
calls by Catholic bishops
over its lethal attacks on communities in Nigeria.
For this and other reasons, such as the full-time employment they had secured, all of the men were determined to return to Ireland despite last week's. 'It's our home, it's where we have made our lives,' one man explained.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Learn More
Support The Journal
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
3 hours ago
- The Journal
Israel launches major attack on Iran
ISRAEL ATTACKED IRAN'S capital Tehran early this morning in strikes which targeted the country's nuclear programme. Iran in turn has launched about 100 drones towards Israel. Israel's military said it is working to intercept the drones launched from Iran. It appears to be the most significant attack Iran has faced since its 1980s war with Iraq, with multiple sites around the country hit. The Journal / YouTube The leader of Iran's paramilitary Revolutionary Guard was killed, Iranian state television reported. Another top Guard official, as well as two nuclear scientists, were also feared dead. The chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces, General Mohammad Bagheri, was also confirmed dead by Iranian state television. Israeli leaders said the attack was necessary to head off what they described as an imminent threat that Iran would build nuclear bombs and they warned of a reprisal which could target civilians in Israel. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei warned 'severe punishment' would be directed at Israel. In a statement carried by the state-run IRNA news agency, he said Israel had 'opened its wicked and blood-stained hand to a crime in our beloved country, revealing its malicious nature more than ever by striking residential centres'. US President Donald Trump told Fox News he had advance notice of the Israeli strikes which Israel's military said involved 200 fighter jets. Trump also stressed that Tehran 'cannot have a nuclear bomb'. The United States underlined that it was not involved in the Israeli action and warned Tehran not to attack its personnel or interests. Multiple sites in the capital were hit in the attack, which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said targeted both nuclear and military sites. Also targeted were officials leading Iran's nuclear programme and its ballistic missile arsenal. The assault came amid warnings from Israel that it would not permit Tehran to build a nuclear weapon, although it remains unclear how close the country is to achieving that. A statement from IDF Spokesperson BG Effie Defrin on the preemptive Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear targets — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 13, 2025 Advertisement Netanyahu said in an address on YouTube that the attacks will continue 'for as many days at it takes to remove this threat'. 'It could be a year. It could be within a few months,' he said as he vowed to pursue the attack for as long as necessary to 'remove this threat'. 'This is a clear and present danger to Israel's very survival.' The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed an Israeli strike hit Iran's uranium enrichment facility at Natanz and said it was closely monitoring radiation levels. Iran currently enriches uranium to 60%, though still short of the 90% needed for a nuclear warhead. The attack followed increasing tensions that led the US to pull some diplomats from Iraq's capital and to offer voluntary evacuations for the families of US troops in the wider Middle East. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Israel took 'unilateral action against Iran' and that Israel advised the US that it believed the strikes were necessary for its self-defence. 'We are not involved in strikes against Iran, and our top priority is protecting American forces in the region,' Rubio said in a statement released by the White House that warned Iran against targeting US interests or personnel. The attack comes as tensions have reached new heights over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear programme. The board of governors at the International Atomic Energy Agency censured Iran on Thursday for the first time in 20 years over its refusal to work with its inspectors. Iran immediately announced it would establish a third enrichment site in the country and swap out some centrifuges for more-advanced ones. Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz said his country carried out the attack, without saying what it targeted. 'In the wake of the state of Israel's preventive attack against Iran, missile and drone attacks against Israel and its civilian population are expected immediately,' he said in a statement. The statement added that Katz 'signed a special order declaring an emergency situation in the home front'. 'It is essential to listen to instructions from the home front command and authorities to stay in protected areas,' it said Both Iran and Israel closed their airspace.
The Journal
8 hours ago
- The Journal
FactCheck: How will Ireland's new system for organ donation work?
IRELAND IS SET to enact a new opt-out organ donation system, which has led to questions about consent, bodily autonomy, and the role of the State in medical decisions. The Human Tissue (Transplantation, Post-Mortem, Anatomical Examination and Public Display) Act 2024 was signed into law more than a year ago; parts of it, including a new 'opt-out' organ donation system, will come into effect on 17 June . According to a explanatory memorandum submitted to the Oireachtas, the bill was intended to 'support and increase organ donation and transplantation in Ireland' by creating a 'soft opt-out system of consent'. This means that people who don't want to donate organs are expected to let their wishes known, rather than the other way around. The memorandum also says the bill will embed the idea that 'consent is the defining principle across all practices related to human tissue'. In other words, people or their families need to give permission over what happens to their bodies after death. However, not all commentators have seen the bill this way. Criticisms of the bill aired in the Oireachtas, when it was the subject of seven debates, ( which can be read here ), including concerns about increases to hospitals' administrative burden, or how data is collected. However, after dozens of amendments — a normal part of the passage of legislation through the Dáil and Seanad — it appears that the Act in its current form enjoys broad support. Online commentators have taken more extreme issues with the Act, and what it has set out to do, taking issue with the very idea of opting-out of organ donation. 'Do you want the state to have ownership over your organs???' reads the caption on a Facebook video, viewed more than 55,000 times since it was posted in May. 'The State will take ownership of the organs of all of its citizens under presumed consent, with the introduction of the Human Tissue Act,' a woman in the video says to camera. The video's description reads: 'If you don't protect domain over your own body, the State can inject and implant whatever they see fit.' But how exactly does the Human Tissue Act change things? Does it mean that the State will own your organs once parts of the legislation become law next week? How organ donation works now Experts who spoke with The Journal said that the new legislation was the first of its kind in Ireland. 'The Human Tissue Act itself is quite a beast,' Colin White, the National Advocacy and Projects Manager with the Irish Kidney Association has said. 'It covers a large, large area. Transplantation and organ donation is only Part Two of the [six-part] legislation.' He also pointed out that the law has not yet been enacted because the Government has sought to figure out how to set up parts of the system, such as the opt-out register. Karen Kilraine, Barrister at Law at The Law Library also told The Journal that organ donation and transplantation in Ireland was largely governed by medical guidelines, ethical guidelines and the principle of consent before now. 'There is no statutory regulatory authority equivalent to the Human Tissue Authority in the UK,' she explained. The Human Tissue Authority in the UK regulates post-mortems, organ donation and transplantation, as the use of human bodies for research, anatomy training, public displays, or medical treatment. The current system in Ireland effectively means that the main considerations for organ donation are the wishes of an individual donor's family, as well as confirmation that the donor is dead. White outlined how this works in practical terms. 'To be in the position to be a potential organ donor, typically you have to be in an intensive care unit on a life support machine, and two independent doctors have to declare you brain stem dead,' he said. 'At that point, the possibility of organ donation can be broached.' There were 263 organ transplants performed in 2024, including 84 from deceased people and 30 from living donors, according to the HSE . The majority of these (175) were kidney donations. (A single dead donor can give multiple organs to separate recipients. For example, both kidneys can be transplanted). White noted that only about 1-2% of people who die will do so in such a way that they are eligible for organ donation. Statistics from other countries give even lower figures . This is largely due to the need for such organs to be recovered shortly after death, but also because the cause of death might damage a person's organs. Initially, Ireland's organ donation system focused primarily on kidney donations. 'The organ donor card was introduced by the Irish Kidney Association back in the late '70s,' White said. 'Originally it was the Kidney Donor Card, because the kidney was the organ that was being mostly transplanted. For the other organs, the science hadn't quite got there. 'Over time, that has morphed into the organ donor card that we know today. The Irish Kidney Association is still responsible. Every single organ donor card that's in the country comes out of our office.' However, despite what many people believe, the card itself doesn't have any legal weight. 'The donor card has space for two signatures on the back of it, one for the owner and one for a person's next of kin,' White explained. 'The idea is then that they take the card and go to a family member and say, 'Here, there's a space for you to sign this. Will you sign here?' 'That's its primary function — it's an icebreaker into the conversation about organ donation. Because typically, it's not something that comes up at the dinner table 'How was your day, dear? And, oh, by the way, in the event of me being a potential organ donor, would you make sure it goes ahead, please?'' Whether or ot not a person has a card, the family of a deceased potential donor will be approached for consent to donate their organs. 'Even if the deceased carries a donor card, their next of kin (as in nearest relatives) still have to consent to the donation,' barrister Karen Kilraine said. Ultimately, both the card and the conversations it may have prompted are only a guide to a family's decision after a person has died. Advertisement What will change under the new law? Under the incoming rules, an opt-out register will be set up, whereby people can register that they do not want to donate their organs after death. There are no plans for an equivalent opt-in register. 'If somebody feels 'I'd rather not be considered a potential organ donor, I'd rather not have my family to have to address that question', they will be able to go to a HSE-run register and record their details,' White told The Journal. 'So in the event that they die in the circumstances where organ donation is a possibility, the first step from the hospital will be to consult the opt-out register.' People who are not included on the register will be 'deemed to consent' to organ donation. However, that is not the end of the legal hurdles. As under the previous system, a person's next-of-kin still has to agree to the donation. The new legislation formalises the concept of a 'designated family member', and will rank these in order, from spouses and civil partners, through siblings, down to friends. If more than one person shares the highest applicable rank, just a single objection is enough to stop an organ from being donated. 'Where a deceased person is not on that register and there is therefore 'deemed consent', a doctor cannot remove organs unless what is termed a 'designated family member' has confirmed in writing that they have no objection to donation,' Kilraine told The Journal. 'The Act does not change that. The decision with respect to organ donation is ultimately settled after death and by someone other than the deceased.'' Given these new restrictions, how is the new system expected to increase the number of organ donations rather than discourage them? 'The idea behind it is to try and kind of make it more the cultural norm, that it's part of the dying process,' White said. 'Under the current system, the conversation might be 'did your loved one have an organ donor card?', or 'did you ever have a conversation about organ donation?', or 'do you think organ donation is something that they would have considered?' — that kind of phraseology.' 'After 17 June, the question will be more about, as the legislation says, 'Is there any reason you think your loved one would have objected to organ donation or not want to have been considered?'' Further restrictions But the legislation still places further restrictions around organ donation after a person dies. Over six chapters, Section 2 of the Human Tissue Act breaks down the rules, principles, and priorities that have to be accounted for during the process. These are too long to delve into in detail, but generally, the Act takes a cautious tone when it comes to donating a dead person's organs. 'In the absence of 'opting out', all adults who are 18 years of age or above, ordinarily resident in the State for 12 months or more, who do not lack capacity and or have not for a significant period of time before their death are deemed to consent to organ donation,' Kilraine said. 'People not satisfying these criteria include children, who cannot be deemed to have given consent.' Kilraine also noted that some sections appear to give 'safeguards', ranging from people who would have consented to donate some particular organs but not others, to those who don't want their organs donated but for whatever reason had never opted out. 'It's not a case of, 'Well, I never got around to opting out, so the State are going to take my organs',' White told The Journal. 'The public can rest assured that if a family member hasn't opted out, their relatives will still be the final port of call. It's written very clearly into the legislation: hospitals cannot bypass the family.' Organs and ownership Given the emphasis on the consent of a person's family, is there any weight to the notion that people's organs will become property of the State, as has been claimed online? 'A dead body is not considered property in Ireland; this is to respect and afford dignity to a dead body and which supersedes any concept of ownership,' Kilraine explained. The term 'property' does not appear once in the Human Tissue Act, nor does the term 'ownership'. The term 'owner' does appear three times, but always in relation a building or business, e.g. 'the owner of the hospital'. Instead, dead bodies and organs are legally put under 'authority', a far more limited concept than that of property. 'Next of kin have certain rights and responsibilities with respect to a dead body including with respect to burial and decisions regarding post mortems and organ donation,' Kilraine said. 'This does not amount to ownership.' 'Where a death is sudden, unexplained or in suspicious circumstances, the coroner has legal authority over the body and can order a post-mortem and or retain the body for investigative purposes. 'This authority when in force supersedes any rights of the next of kin or family. It is however as a custodian, and neither the coroner or the State have ownership of a dead body. 'None of the above are changed by the Act. Organs of dead people would not be said to be property of the state or of anyone else.' The gift of life The new Irish legislation follows opt-out systems that have been put in place in other countries, including in every jurisdiction in the United Kingdom. However, since being introduced in England in 2020, it has not had a major impact on the number of organs that have been donated. In large part, this was due to potential donations being overruled by patients' families. Of the 1,036 cases where deemed consent applied, the family did not support donation 446 times, according to statistics from the NHS . In many ways, the conversation encouraged by the Kidney Donor Cards since the '70s is still the key to successfully enabling organ donations. 'When we lose a loved one, there's very much that element of powerlessness,' White told The Journal 'And then there's this opportunity, if you're in that 1-2%, to transform the lives of others.' 'I've witnessed, over the years, donor families coming up to the transplant recipients to say 'thank you', which is mind blowing. The recipients say 'No, hold on there! It's your loved one and your decision that has allowed me to do what I'm doing'. 'But the donor families say: 'No. It brings some degree of meaning to the loss of our loved one.'' 'We have to think of organ donation, not only in terms of the recipients, but equally of the donor family,' White said. 'We've lost a loved one, but there are other families out there who are getting to celebrate another of life's milestones, to see another Christmas, to share another sunrise.' The Human Tissue Act introduces a new framework for organ donation, however the rights of surviving family members remain paramount. 'Empower your family. Have the conversation,' White implored. 'Or, some might put it a different way: take the decision out of your family's hands by letting them know what you want.' Want to be your own fact-checker? Visit our brand-new FactCheck Knowledge Bank for guides and toolkits The Journal's FactCheck is a signatory to the International Fact-Checking Network's Code of Principles. You can read it here . For information on how FactCheck works, what the verdicts mean, and how you can take part, check out our Reader's Guide here . You can read about the team of editors and reporters who work on the factchecks here . Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... It is vital that we surface facts from noise. Articles like this one brings you clarity, transparency and balance so you can make well-informed decisions. We set up FactCheck in 2016 to proactively expose false or misleading information, but to continue to deliver on this mission we need your support. Over 5,000 readers like you support us. If you can, please consider setting up a monthly payment or making a once-off donation to keep news free to everyone. Learn More Support The Journal
The Journal
18 hours ago
- The Journal
Ireland needs a plan to protect its undersea cables and government wants your views
THE GOVERNMENT HAS asked the public to contribute to a maritime security document that will be used to secure Ireland's huge undersea cables and shipping routes in the Atlantic and Irish Sea. Tanaiste and Minister for Defence Simon Harris is launching the public consultation for the National Maritime Security Strategy . Government have said that the strategy will map out Ireland's approach to maritime security over the next five years, with a particular focus on dealing with emerging threats and vulnerabilities and protecting our subsea infrastructure. The document's public consultation phase has been announced in the context of a more dynamic fervour for defence in Europe. The Journal has learned that a major contract has been agreed and due to be announced for the provision of Sonar for the Irish Naval Service. That will likely be announced in the coming week. In December 2022 Micheál Martin, who was then Taoiseach, said that a National Security Strategy was being worked on. Public consultation began in December 2019. Earlier this year The Journal reported that the National Security Strategy had been further delayed . In February the Taoiseach said that there would be pressure on Ireland to increase Defence capability. Security and civil service sources have said that this has caused a more urgent atmosphere across State institutions. Advertisement The public consultation will run over the next four weeks with the Tánaiste today inviting submissions from interested individuals or groups. The new maritime security strategy is expected to be published before the end of the year and is likely to focus on security of critical undersea infrastructure such as internet and electrical cables. Simon Harris said: 'As an island nation with one of the largest sea areas in Europe, it is absolutely vital that we have a robust and effective maritime security strategy in place. 'This strategy will be crucial to assessing any potential threats and vulnerabilities with a particular focus on protecting our undersea infrastructure. 'As such, this public consultation that I am launching today marks a critical opportunity to shape Ireland's approach to safeguarding our waters. 'We want to encourage an open, constructive dialogue and this will enable us to build consensus on the diverse threats, risks, challenges and opportunities being faced by the country,' he said. The Department of Defence said this morning that it will be the first strategy of its kind to identify and prioritise the risks and threats Ireland faces in the maritime domain, and will include a plan to address the most urgent and immediate concerns. Ireland has one of the largest maritime EEZ in the EU, with a maritime area that is seven times our land area. Approximately 78 per cent of Ireland's energy needs is imported on ships or via pipelines and 90 per cent of Irelands trade by volume is transported by the sea. More than 95 per cent of international data and voice transfers are routed through undersea fibre optic cables and the majority of transatlantic data passes through cables situated in Ireland's EEZ. Approximately 80 per cent of the country's population live in coastal counties. The research and lead agency for the development of the strategy will be the Department of Defence's Maritime Security Unit. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
