The Finnish Immigration Service ruled that the removal to Italy does not meet the threshold for unreasonable hardship, which could have allowed the family to stay despite the existing protection status. Photo: Emmi Korhonen / Lehtikuva
- Next Article Baby born in hospital car park after rapid labour in Tampere
Finnish authorities plan to deport a woman and her two young children to Italy, where they previously received international protection. The decision comes months after the family was held in an immigration detention unit for nearly two months over the winter.
The woman, referred to only as Mary for protection reasons, is originally from Nigeria. She was held with her children at the Joutseno detention unit in Konnunsuo, a former prison facility, after police failed to locate her in December.
Authorities justified her detention on grounds that she might flee or hide.
Mary’s two children, aged two and six, remained in detention with her until April, when the family was released. The Eastern Finland Administrative Court later ruled their detention was unjustified.
They were first transferred to a reception centre in Joutseno, then moved to Pori to await a decision on Mary’s renewed asylum application.
Mary said she feared returning to Italy, where she claims she was trafficked into prostitution. She also cited threats from a criminal network, her ex-partner, and a pimp. According to her, her ex-partner in Italy has expressed intentions to send their daughter to Nigeria for genital cutting.
Mary said she had approached the police for protection in Italy but received no help. Finnish immigration authorities concluded that her claims lacked credibility and again declined to assess her need for protection. Italy had already granted her international protection, and officials argue she should seek assistance from Italian authorities.
Her legal counsel, Emmi Wehka-aho, said the system failed to consider the risks she faced.
“Her need for protection in Italy has been dismissed, along with the fact that she already went to the police there to seek help,” Wehka-aho said.
She added that the human trafficking support system in Finland had rejected Mary’s account based on an incomplete interview conducted under stress, without legal representation and with problems in interpretation.
The Finnish Immigration Service ruled that the removal to Italy does not meet the threshold for unreasonable hardship, which could have allowed the family to stay despite the existing protection status.
Authorities stated that children’s interests would be served by remaining with their mother. A social worker’s report submitted with the renewed asylum application said the children’s wellbeing would be best ensured by staying in Finland.
Wehka-aho said no formal child welfare assessment had been carried out, even though multiple child protection reports had been filed.
She also said that the South Karelia wellbeing services county had earlier decided an assessment was needed, but the process stopped when the family requested to relocate to Pori.
“No one has properly followed through with assessing the children’s need for protection,” Wehka-aho said.
Mary’s appeal of the negative asylum decision remains pending, but her request for an emergency stay on deportation was rejected. This means the deportation to Italy may proceed while the appeal is still under consideration.
HT
- Next Article Baby born in hospital car park after rapid labour in Tampere
Source: www.helsinkitimes.fi
