A Nigerian woman who claimed she was being prevented by the Minister for Justice from getting maximum publicity for her challenge to a deportation order has lost High Court proceedings. She was challenging legislation requiring the consent of the Minister for Justice before her identity could be revealed in the media.
Mr Justice Murphy said Ms Margaret Moni Jonathan had already been named in the media, following the granting of the Minister's consent, during court proceedings and there was no restriction on her being named. He ruled the application was "moot".
Ms Jonathan applied for refugee status in October 1999 on the ground of a fear of persecution because of her political opinions, her involuntary association with the Ogboni Fraternity in Nigeria and/or her religious beliefs. Her application was turned down and her deportation was later ordered.
She brought a legal challenge to her deportation and claimed she was entitled to have her case heard in public as a right and not by special grace or favour or concession or permission of the Minister.
Yesterday's judgment concerned separate proceedings in which she challenged a requirement under Section 19 of the Refugee Act for ministerial consent before she could be named in media reports. She objected to the section because, she claimed, it was not legal and prevented the right of freedom of speech and of people to hear "our story". The effect of Section 19 was to frustrate asylum-seekers, which frustration led to crime, she said. "The law says you are not allowed to tell your story." She wanted her story to be known to the media as she had been treated unjustly. If she was deported, she would be treated unjustly.
In July 2001, the Minister gave his consent to her identification and claimed Ms Jonathan's challenge was "moot". During her evidence, Ms Jonathan had agreed there was nothing now to prevent her from going to the media.
A Department official had told the court that there been no rejection of an application to the Minister to allow an asylum-seeker to be named. The official agreed the procedure was cumbersome and that was why, he believed, it was due to be amended.
Ms Jonathan told the court she had demonstrated with a placard for her right to work. In December 1999 she got a work permit. She worked in a hospital, worked as a security officer and went to a nursing school, where she is in her second year. A photograph of her placard was published in the Irish Independent in 1999 and she had been photographed previously in The Irish Times.
In his judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Murphy said the woman had already been named in media reports of her court proceedings following the Minister's decision to give his consent in July 2001.
The only aspect of possible prejudice she could have suffered after July 2001 was the so-called "chilling effect" of the legislation, which would have had the effect of restricting the media from dealing with Ms Jonathan's case because of a perceived delay in getting ministerial consent.
But, the judge said, no journalist had attempted to get the woman's own consent which, it seemed, was an essential prerequisite for the Minister's consent. Ms Jonathan had not sought to contact any journalist. She was clearly under a misapprehension, despite being legally advised, that she could not do so until the Minister gave his consent.
Mr Justice Murphy said Ms Jonathan's application in her challenge to the Act, for which she said she wanted publicity, was not an issue. Those proceedings had been reported using her name.
The judge said there was now no restriction on Ms Jonathan's other proceedings against the deportation order. She had not established that her interests had been adversely affected.