Injunction move over protests outside asylum centre suspended
A High Court injunction application over protests against improvement works at an 18th-century mansion in Kildare - housing some 93 female international protection applicants - has been suspended following a separate dispute over the planning status of the building.
On Wednesday, Mr Justice David Nolan adjourned the injunction application relating to protests outside Ryevale House in Leixlip with liberty to re-enter.
Advertisement
This means the injunction application is no longer urgent but could be revived if circumstances change.
The protests began after works began in March to improve water pressure for the three-storey mansion which is in the middle of some 200 houses in Ryevale, Leixlip.
In March, the owners of the house, ME Liberer Unlimited Company, obtained an interim injunction preventing a number of residents from interfering with Irish Water (Uisce Éireann) contractors carrying out works to improve water pressure at the building which has accommodated the international protection applicants since March 2023.
The court heard Irish Water had said, after the protests began, that work would not continue given concerns for the safety of the contractor's workers.
Advertisement
On Wednesday, when the case returned to court, Niall Handy SC, for ME Liberer, said it appeared, however, the protests had ceased because the defendants had been told by Irish Water that they would not be upgrading the supply because of the planning status of the building.
His client believes it is exempted but An Bord Pleanála had found works at the property were not exempt. Counsel said this was not the issue when these protests started, counsel said.
In circumstances, Mr Handy said there was no need at this stage to move the injunction and his side wrote to the defendants asking that in the event the water workers return that the protests would not resume.
The defendants were however seeking that the injunction be heard, he said.
Advertisement
Rory Kennedy BL, for the defendants, said the position was that Irish Water requires, as part of any application for works, that the applicant state that there is compliance with planning.
Questioned by the judge about the alleged blockading of workers by residents, Mr Kennedy said his side did not accept what the plaintiff was claiming. There was an issue yet to be decided as to whether this was a lawful protest or an illegal blockade, he said.
Ireland
Murder accused Richard Satchwell cut dressing gown...
Read More
He said his clients are all over 70 and they wanted it to be pushed on to hearing.
Mr Justice Nolan said while the defendants were over 70, they were not elderly. He (the judge) was approaching that age "and I don't regard myself as elderly".
Parties in cases don't seem to understand that court time is precious, and it is not for the defendants to demand that the case be heard. It would be a waste of time depending on what happens in the future, he said.
He adjourned the case generally with liberty to re-enter it should circumstances change.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
17 hours ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Justice Minister defends deportation of children to Nigeria
It would be 'untenable' to have an immigration system in which children could not be deported, the Minister for Justice has said. Jim O'Callaghan said it would not be a 'good idea' to prevent the deportation of children as it would have a 'very significant impact' on the number of people seeking asylum in Ireland. Advertisement He was speaking after five children and nine women were among 35 people deported from Ireland to Nigeria on Wednesday night. The minister said the move, which was the third chartered flight used for deportations this year, was 'value for money' at a cost of 324,714 euro. Speaking on Friday, Mr O'Callaghan said: 'Can I just say it's not a pleasant part of the job, but it is a very important part of the job. 'In order to have a functioning immigration system, there has to be a consequence for people who are in the country unlawfully, whether they have overstayed a work permit, or whether they sought asylum and have not been granted asylum. Advertisement 'I've heard the commentary in respect of children being deported. 'I think the system will become untenable if we introduce rules or a new policy that says children cannot be deported.' He added: 'It's an unpleasant part of the job, but I think if I introduced a policy like that, the effect would be that we'd be an outlier in Europe, and that people would know that if they came to Ireland seeking asylum with children, that irrespective of the outcome, they couldn't be removed. 'It would have a very significant impact in the number of people coming to Ireland seeking asylum. So I don't think it's a good idea.' Advertisement The minister said Ireland is a 'very fair country' in allowing people seeking asylum to integrate into communities. 'The alternative is that we would do what they do in some countries and don't allow any form of integration – we allow people to integrate. He added: 'But I suppose a consequence of the asylum process is if you apply and you're refused there has to be a consequence, and if there isn't a consequence then what's the point in having the whole system in place in the first place? 'I can understand the concern that people have about it, but I just say the system will become untenable if a rule was introduced which said that children could not be deported. Advertisement 'It would mean that people could come to Ireland with children in the knowledge that no matter what the outcome, they would never be required to leave.' Mr O'Callaghan said his message to people was that they had to comply with the law. 'If you receive a deportation order, you have to comply with it. It's not meaningless. It means something. 'If you get a deportation order, and if you have children, you've got to get your circumstances in order, and that requires you to leave.' Advertisement Speaking at Leinster House earlier on Friday, Sinn Féin TD Eoin O Broin said that the international protection system needs to be 'compassionate', 'human rights-based', and 'timely'. He said: 'Nobody should be waiting three, four or five years for the final decision to be made, and then when people are refused, not just refused in the first instance, but refused on appeal, they need to be safely returned to their country of origin. 'So that's the way the system should work. Obviously, we've expressed enormous concern in the way in which the government is operating the current system.' Ireland Total of 120 new garda recruits sworn in at ceremo... Read More He added: 'There's far too much privateering, very poor-quality accommodation for adults and children awaiting the decisions. The decisions are taking far, far too long, and I know that from working with people inside the process. 'Where people are refused and are to be returned to the country of origin, it needs to be done in a compassionate and a safe manner. 'We will continue to raise our concerns with the government, but the system has to work. It has to work fairly efficiently, but ultimately the decisions have to be enforced.'
Telegraph
a day ago
- Telegraph
Trump adds Ireland to trade ‘blacklist'
Donald Trump has added Ireland to the White House's official blacklist of countries for the nation's trade surplus with the US. Ireland joins fellow new entrant Switzerland in the US treasury's bad books, on a list that includes regular US targets including China, Japan, Germany, Vietnam and South Korea. Appearing on the watchlist puts Ireland, whose dominant industries are pharmaceuticals and technology, at the front of the queue of countries likely to attract Mr Trump's ire. If escalated, it can open the door to tariffs and other sanctions. The US president has previously singled out Ireland as a country whose trade surplus hurts the US economy. 'We do have a massive deficit with Ireland, because Ireland was very smart. They took our pharmaceutical companies away,' he told Micheál Martin, the Irish Taoiseach, in the Oval Office in March. He even considered putting a 200pc tariff on US pharmaceutical imports from Ireland. 'We don't want to do anything to hurt Ireland. We do want fairness,' he said. Ireland's goods exports to the US surged by 49pc in the first quarter of 2025 from the same period a year earlier, the country's statistics office reported this week, as exporters scrambled to get shipments off before any of Mr Trump's tariffs kicked in. The export surge fuelled a 9.7pc bounce in Ireland's GDP in the first quarter. Irish exports are under dire threat from Mr Trump's potential tariff of 50pc on goods imports from the EU. Dublin and other European capitals are now sweating on Brussels' negotiations with Washington to avoid this levy hitting the bloc in early July. On Friday, the German central bank warned that if the two sides did not strike a deal, Europe's biggest economy would remain mired in recession until 2027. German data issued on Friday showed a 1.4pc drop in factory output in April and a 10.3pc slump in German exports to the US from a month earlier, as pre-tariff, front-end loading of trans-Atlantic shipments came to a halt. The two sides' trade negotiators met in Paris this week. Maros Sefcovic, the EU trade commissioner, said afterwards that talks were 'advancing in the right direction at pace', while Jamieson Greer, the US trade representative, declared himself 'pleased that negotiations are advancing quickly'. They have slightly more than four weeks until the expiry of a 90-day pause on Mr Trump's tariffs on July 9. The president has frequently expressed hostility towards the EU over its trade policies, but was peaceable towards a visiting Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, at a meeting in the Oval Office on Thursday. 'We'll end up hopefully with a trade deal,' he told reporters. 'I'm OK with the tariffs, or we make a deal with the trade.' The US treasury's report on Friday – a twice-yearly 'Monitoring List of major trading partners whose currency practices and macroeconomic policies merit close attention' – had some advice for both Germany and Ireland. Dublin was urged to focus on boosting activity in its domestic economy', to help Ireland 'address its over-reliance' on export-focused multinational companies. Berlin was told that Germany's unbalanced trade with the US was caused by German businesses and consumers failing to open their wallets and spend their savings.
The Guardian
a day ago
- The Guardian
Trump's new travel ban is a gratuitously cruel sequel
I'm not much for horror movies, but I have just read that the film Black Phone 2 'will creep into cinemas' in October and that, compared to the original, it's supposed to be a 'more violent, scarier, more graphic' film. I'll pass on the movie, but that description seems pretty apt to what living under this Trump administration feels like: a gratuitously more violent sequel to a ghoulish original. Consider the Muslim ban. Back in late 2015, candidate Donald Trump called for 'a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on'. He signed the first version of the Muslim ban on 27 January 2017, and protests erupted at airports across the nation at the revival of a national policy, similar to the Chinese Exclusion Act, that bars entry of whole swaths of people based on our national prejudices. It took the Trump administration three attempts at crafting this policy before the supreme court tragically greenlit it. While Joe Biden later reversed the policy, congressional moves to restrict the president's ability to institute these blanket bans – such as the No Ban Act – have not succeeded. And on the first day of his second term, Trump indicated he was prepared to institute a wider-reaching travel ban. He has now done just that. The new executive order will 'fully restrict and limit the entry [to the US] of nationals of the following 12 countries: Afghanistan, Burma, Chad, Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen' and will also 'partially restrict and limit the entry of nationals of the following 7 countries: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela'. Yes, there are key cutouts in the latest travel ban that make it a different animal from the original 2017 ban, but it still derives from the same family. Green-card holders, those with valid visas issued before the executive order was proclaimed, and professional athletes representing their countries in the forthcoming World Cup, for example, are exempt, illustrating how the administration has learned to write more litigation-resistant immigration exclusion orders. But make no mistake. Such a policy is alienating, counterproductive and simply racist. For one thing, Trump claims that the ban is necessary because the selected countries exhibit either 'a significant terrorist presence', a lack of cooperation in accepting back their nationals, or high rates of visa overstays. According to the Entry/Exit Overstay Report for fiscal year 2023 (the last one available), the number of people from Equatorial Guinea, a small African country, who overstayed their B1/B2 visas (travel to the US for business or pleasure) was 200. From the United Kingdom, it was 15,712. It's true that the percentage (as opposed to the number) of people overstaying their visas from Equatorial Guinea is significantly higher than UK overstays. But Djibouti, which hosts the primary US military base in for operations in Africa, has an even higher percentage of B1/B2 visa overstayers than Equatorial Guinea – yet it isn't part of the ban, illustrating how much it is based on narrow political calculations and cheap theatrics. The capriciousness of the policy was immediately evident after Trump released a video explaining his decision. 'The recent terror attack in Boulder, Colorado, has underscored the extreme dangers posed for our country by the entry of foreign nationals who are not properly vetted, as well as those who come here as temporary visitors and overstayed their visas,' he said, adding: 'We don't want them.' Yet, as everyone knows, the suspect in the Boulder, Colorado, attack is an Egyptian national, another key US ally. And Egypt is not on the list. Nor should it be, because these lists of banned countries collapse individuals into vague categories of suspicion and malfeasance. Why should the actions of one person from any given country mark a completely different person as inadmissible? Trump may sound tough to his supporters when announcing the ban, but such broad-brush applications against basically all the nationals of comparatively powerless countries is hardly the flex that Trump thinks it is. In the eyes of the rest of the world, the new policy mostly makes the administration look like a bully, picking on a handful of Muslim-majority countries, a few African and Asian states, a couple of its traditional enemies, and Haiti. Meanwhile, the rest of the world also sees how the Trump administration has withdrawn temporary protections from more than 500,000 people from Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela and Nicaragua, suspended refugee resettlement from around the world, and yet welcomed in dozens of white Afrikaners from South Africa to the United States as refugees. The ethnocentrism of the policy is as naked as it is opportunistic. The truth is that the damage from Trump's first-term Muslim ban was long-lasting and had all kinds of collateral impact, including on the mental health of family members living in the United States. And immigrant advocacy organizations are already sharply criticizing this latest version. AfghanEvac, a non-profit organization that facilitates the resettlement of Afghans who worked with American troops, stated that the new ban 'is not about national security – it is about political theater'. To include Afghanistan among the banned countries, even as thousands of Afghans worked alongside American forces, is to Shawn VanDiver, the group's founder and president, 'a moral disgrace. It spits in the face of our allies, our veterans, and every value we claim to uphold.' Trump's latest travel ban, his ramped-up immigration deportation regime, his international student crackdown, and his all but ending asylum in the United States add up to a clearly a concerted attempt to stave off the inevitable while vilifying the marginal. Demographers have been telling us for years now that the US will be a 'majority minority' country around 2045, a prospect that has long frightened many of the white conservatives who make up Trump's base. In response, Trump is pursuing a policy that draws on the most basic kind of nativism around, and one we've seen before in the United States. The 1924 Immigration Act severely restricted immigration to the US to keep America as white and as western European as possible. Only in 1965 were the laws finally changed, with the national immigration quotas lifted, laying the foundation for the multicultural society we have today. That earlier movie of epic exclusion lasted some 41 years. So far, this sequel is violent, scary and authoritarian. It had better be a short film. Moustafa Bayoumi is a Guardian US columnist
