Deporting blind girl not unduly harsh or unjust, says judge
A failed court bid to prevent the deportation of a 5-year-old blind South Canterbury girl has sparked calls for changes to immigration policy.
Green MP and Rangitata candidate Mojo Mathers labelled the case ‘‘appalling’’, and said Immigration New Zealand should not rule out people with health issues or disabilities ‘‘solely on the basis of cost’’.
However, the Immigration Minister Michael Woodhouse says requirements around health are ‘‘entirely appropriate’’.
Mathers’ comments were prompted by a decision to deport Caitlyn Davies back to South Africa.
Caitlyn is blind, suffers from global development delay, and has chronic medical conditions the Immigration Protection Tribunal considered would impose significant costs on New Zealand’s health and education systems.
Mathers said the Greens wanted the rules changed around deporting people with disability or health conditions.
‘‘It’s particularly cruel to be deporting children with health conditions. We should be, and are, better than that,’’ she said.
‘‘While there is a financial cost, it is wrong to split up families who are making a positive contribution to New Zealand and send their children to an uncertain future where their basic needs won’t be met.’’
Immigration needed to take into account factors such as family reunification or the net contribution families were making, she said.
‘‘Many of these are the very families that if we welcome them here will give back to society a thousand fold.
‘‘Immigration should not be just about the economy, it should also be about what kind of society we want to have.’’
Woodhouse said all applicants had the right to have a decision by Immigration New Zealand tested and in this case, the decision was upheld.
‘‘While I have sympathy for the family, immigration policy requires that all individuals coming to NZ have an acceptable standard of health. That requirement is entirely appropriate,’’ Woodhouse said.
The Davies family is in the process of assessing their options after their fight to keep Caitlyn in the country failed.
Caitlyn’s interim visa expired in July last year, meaning she was unlawfully in New Zealand.
The Immigration Protection Tribunal’s decision that her health conditions would impose significant costs on the health and education systems.meant she would have to be deported back to South Africa.
The Davies’ lawyer, Andrew Riches, appealed the decision to the High Court.
Judge Gerald Nation found in favour of the tribunal’s decision that it would not be ‘‘unjust or unduly harsh’’ to deport her.
Riches said the family was struggling to take the decision in.
’’[Mother Charmaine] is absolutely devastated. She really doesn’t know what the family is going to do from here, all she knows is returning to South Africa is simply not an option because she won’t be safe there.’’
Last October the tribunal refused an appeal against Caitlyn’s deportation, but gave the family three months to better plan for, and finance, returning to South Africa.
Immigration New Zealand declined to issue Caitlyn the same visas granted to the rest of her family because she was ‘‘not considered to be of an acceptable standard of health’’, Judge Nation’s judgment said.
The tribunal recognised Caitlyn had a better chance at life here than in South Africa, where there were limited educational opportunities for disabled children and a high rate of violent crime in schools.
It considered the high level of support she received at kindergarten ‘‘would have to continue indefinitely’’ if she started primary school here in May.
Riches said the tribunal accepted there were ‘‘exceptional humanitarian circumstances’’ for her to remain, but simultaneously ruled it would not be ‘‘unduly harsh to remove her’’.
"Immigration should not be just about the economy.'' Green MP Mojo Mathers