Judgment: 2006-02-15 · Court archive

High Court rejects Lidia Cosma challenge to deportation after suicide-risk submissions

High Court · [2006] IEHC 36

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Lidia Cosma (Applicant)
What

High Court rejects Lidia Cosma challenge to deportation after suicide-risk submissions

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Ireland
  • Romania
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The judge found that the psychiatric material did not contain an objective diagnosis or proposed treatment and was based principally on Cosma's account during a single interview. He held that she had not proved a real and substantial suicide risk, had not shown that revoking deportation was the only means of preventing self-harm, and had not established that the Minister overlooked material evidence.

The High Court has dismissed Romanian national Lidia Cosma's attempt to overturn a decision allowing her deportation to proceed despite submissions that she might take her own life if returned to Romania.

Cosma arrived in Ireland on September 5, 1999 and applied for asylum on grounds including alleged religious oppression. Her refugee application was refused in 2001. After further representations seeking permission to remain also failed, the Minister for Justice signed a deportation order on July 4, 2003.

Her solicitors subsequently sought reconsideration. In September and October 2003 they supplied documents from consultant psychiatrist Dr Brian McCaffrey expressing concern about Cosma's threat of suicide if deported. The material referred to her account of the accidental death of her young niece in Romania and the distress she said followed.

Department officials reviewed the submissions. On October 31, 2003, Cosma was informed that the Minister had considered the medical material and affirmed the deportation order. The department's position was that the suicide threat should be addressed clinically and did not, by itself, mean immigration law should cease to apply.

In judicial review proceedings, Cosma argued that her constitutional rights to life and bodily integrity required particularly close scrutiny of the decision.

Mr Justice Hanna accepted that an alleged threat to life justified careful examination. However, he stressed that the High Court remained a reviewing court and could not substitute its own decision for that of the Minister.

The judge found that the psychiatric material did not contain an objective diagnosis or proposed treatment and was based principally on Cosma's account during a single interview. He held that she had not proved a real and substantial suicide risk, had not shown that revoking deportation was the only means of preventing self-harm, and had not established that the Minister overlooked material evidence.

The court found no legal or constitutional defect in the decision-making process and dismissed the application.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review