The mental stress and burden faced by undocumented children, the fear of deportation and stigma associated with not being considered a citizen and the difficulties faced when accessing supports that other children take for granted, can be taken away by a minor change to an unkind and unjust amendment to our constitution that was introduced in 2004. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship (Naturalisation of Minors Born in Ireland) Bill would provide a pathway to citizenship for children who are currently facing deportation, despite having been born in Ireland and resident here all their lives. The 27th Amendment to the Constitution, which passed in 2004, removed the automatic right to citizenship upon birth. Once it was passed, children born in Ireland lost the constitutional right to citizenship on birth; the amendment gives the Oireachtas power to legislate for routes to citizenship and naturalisation instead. Following the referendum, the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act 2004 was passed which effectively removed any accessible route to citizenship for children born in Ireland. As a result, Irish citizenship law is now based on blood ties, not birthright. We do not need another referendum to reverse this. The 2004 amendment gave the Oireachtas the power to legislate for more generous pathways to citizenship. The Irish Nationality and Citizenship (Naturalisation of Minors Born in Ireland) Bill 2018 would provide a pathway to citizenship for children born in Ireland. It was passed through Second Stage by a majority of Senators on 21 November 2018; Senators from Fianna Fáil, Sinn Féin and the Green Party supported it, although Fine Gael opposed it. The Bill is being brought back before the Seanad for ‘Committee Stage’ on Wednesday 2nd of December next. Please contact your local Senator and TD's to say that you believe that Children born here should belong here.

Under the Domestic Violence Act 2018, there are three different orders that victims of abuse can apply at the District Court. These are; Barring Orders, Safety Orders, and Temporary Protection Orders. In many cases, the perpetrator must be notified of an order against them - either orally by the applicant or Gardaí, or they will be notified of the order by post. An order does not take effect until it is served to the respondent. In the case of a protection order, or an interim barring order, the court usually directs that order to be served on the respondent by An Garda Síochána. . The Orders that cause the most issue are Barring or Safety orders as these have both the victims and the abusers addresses on them.

We need your help urgently to stop illegal evictions in Sheikh Jarrah. Please help Mohammad Sabbagh and other residents to keep their home in East Jerusalem. Mohammad is just one Sheikh Jarrah resident who faces becoming a refugee for the second time. Mohammad and his family were originally made refugees in 1948 during what Palestinians call the 'Nakba', meaning catastrophe, which saw between 750,000 and 1,000,000 Palestinians driven from their land in what Israel calls its War of Independence. The Sabbagh family fled from Jaffa and were awarded a home in then Jordanian controlled East Jerusalem in 1956 when the UN built 26 houses for 30 Palestinian families who had fled from Jaffa, Haifa and West Jerusalem. In 1967 Israel illegally annexed East Jerusalem and has since made every effort to remove the Palestinian population and cut the city off from the rest of the West Bank. Mohammad is now in his 70's and faces becoming a refugee for the second time in his life. Since 2008 he and his family have been battling a settler group in court over ownership of their property. The Israeli courts have unsurprisingly ruled in favour of the illegal settlers, and 45 members of the family are now facing forced eviction from their homes. In the last week Mohammad was issued with an eviction notice to vacate his home before November 24th. His lawyer has lodged a successful appeal which has moved the case to a higher court. But the threat of eviction remains high for Mohammad and other residents of Sheikh Jarrah. Why Sheikh Jarrah? Sheikh Jarrah has come under mounting pressure from the Israeli government in recent years. The East Jerusalem neighbourhood is a key target for settler activity due to its location. Sheikh Jarrah is located in close proximity to the Green Line (1949 Armistice Line). Sheikh Jarrah has been at the forefront of Israeli efforts to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from Jerusalem. What does international law say? According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs the 1967 occupation and annexation of East Jerusalem is not recognized by the international community, “with the UN Security Council repeatedly declaring all legislative measures and actions taken by Israel to alter the character and status of Jerusalem to be null and void.” Furthermore This eviction amounts to forcible transfer, which is in direct contravention of the fourth Geneva Convention. Article 49, first paragraph, of the Fourth Geneva Convention states: “Individual or mass forcible transfers, as well as deportations of protected persons from occupied territory to the territory of the Occupying Power or to that of any other country, occupied or not, are prohibited, regardless of their motive.” Take action We therefore demand Minister of Foreign Affairs, Simon Coveney take urgent action on this matter and call for an immediate halt to the forced displacement of Mohammad Sabbagh, his family, and community. Please take a moment to sign and share this petition. Further reading https://www.ochaopt.org/content/imminent-eviction-palestinian-family-east-jerusalem https://eyewitnessblogs.com/2020/05/29/you-know-we-like-life-and-we-have-a-right-to-live-it-evictions-and-resistance-in-sheikh-jarrah/ https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/1/15/israel-evicting-palestinian-family-to-replace-them-with-settlers

The Indian poet Varavara Rao was arrested and jailed in the aftermath of a violent protest at Bhima Koregan on 1 January 2018. Alongside ten other defendants, Varavara Rao denies all the charges raised against him. The elderly poet contracted COVID-19 while in prison and has been over two years in jail under appalling conditions without trial.

In 2020, Climate Case Ireland took the Government to the Supreme Court for failing to act on climate change - and won. However, the fight for climate justice isn’t over. Ireland’s Climate Bill 2020 threatens to undermine the impact of the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment in Climate Case Ireland and creates a legal framework so weak as to be incapable of enabling the urgent action needed. The Climate Bill must be revised to protect the historic Supreme Court judgment and ensure that Ireland finally adopts legislation which has climate justice, a just transition, and a clear commitment to remaining below +1.5°C as its central organizing principles. Sign your name to let the Government know they must fix Ireland’s Climate Bill! #FixThe Bill 1. Learn from Climate Case Ireland: Climate Case Ireland successfully challenged the Government’s 2017 National Mitigation Plan on the basis that the Government had failed to specify how it would achieve the objective of the original 2015 Climate Act within section 4(2)(a). The re-drafted 2020 Climate Bill makes changes to reduce accountability such as: a. Removing and replacing section 4(2)(a) of the Act. To preserve the effect of the Supreme Court's judgment, section 4(7), as inserted by the Bill, should be deleted or amended to be "without prejudice" to section 4(6); b. Requiring the government only to “pursue” the 2050 goal rather than “pursue and achieve”; the latter was the phrase used in the 2015 Act and in the previous Government’s 2019 Heads of Bill; c. Use of weak, permissive language to reduce legal accountability, such as “have regard to” and “in the opinion of the Government/Minister”; d. The Bill no longer refers to achieving an “environmentally sustainable economy”. This should be reinstated. 2. A 2030 Target: The National Climate Objective should reflect an explicit commitment to complete decarbonisation (not “net-zero”)* by 2030 at the very latest and an equitable and scientifically sound commitment to remaining below +1.5C (*zero energy emissions combined with nature-based solutions that enhance biodiversity to sequester carbon from sectors where some emissions remain inevitable). The Bill should include a ratchet mechanism empowering the Minister to bring forward the decarbonisation year and interim targets, which are needed in the Bill. 3. Climate Justice and Just Transition: Decarbonising Ireland’s economy in a decade will not be easy. The principles of climate justice and just transition should be defined and should include the principle of a progressive distribution of the financial burden of climate mitigation and adaptation measures. These must be the central organizing principles of the Bill, with clear accountability mechanisms. 4. Reliance on undeveloped and untested technologies: The Bill should aim for complete decarbonisation by 2030, rather than a ‘climate neutral economy’ – the Bill currently implies large-scale use of unproven CO2 “removal” technologies. 5. Interim targets: The Bill’s carbon budgets should be pegged to interim targets that will put Ireland on a pathway to a decarbonisation target year of 2030. 6. 7% not enough: The Programme for Government commitment to reduce emissions by 7% a year on average over the next decade is not enough to make a fair share contribution to keeping global temperature rise below +1.5°C. 7. Strengthen language: The requirement to ‘have regard to’ should be strengthened to ‘consistent with’ in relation to: a. The objective of the UNFCCC and the temperature limits specified in the Paris Agreement b. Fulfilling the principles of climate justice and just transition; c. Fulfilling the objectives of the National Biodiversity Action Plan and the Aarhus Convention. 8. Legal accountability needs to be built in throughout the Bill: Carbon budgets should be legally binding, and all activities undertaken by public bodies, Government departments and private industry should be consistent with the carbon budgets. Failure to remain within the carbon budget limit should be met with clear sanctions. 9. Obligations on public bodies: all public bodies should be required to carry out their duties in a manner ‘consistent with’ the temperature limits and principles of the Paris Agreement. 10. Reparations: Financing emissions reductions efforts overseas alongside the provision of technological support should be viewed as reparations for harms done due to climate change under the Loss and Damage mechanism. 11. Include emissions from international aviation and shipping. 12. Impact assessment and reporting: All plans, projects and programmes should be assessed for their full climate impacts including non-territorial emissions. The EPA should be tasked with monitoring and reporting on “consumption emissions” in addition to territorial emissions. 13. Fossil fuel infrastructure and fracked gas: The construction of new fossil fuel infrastructure and the re-permitting of existing infrastructure should be prohibited by the Bill, including for example liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals and gas-fired power plants and storage facilities. We also call for the insertion into the Bill of a section amending the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960 to prohibit the importation or sale of fracked gas. 14. Actively disseminate information on the functions of public bodies under the Bill & guarantee public participation. 15. Provisions relating to the Climate Change Advisory Council should be amended to: a. Replace voting ex-officio members with independent experts in industrial relations, law and social justice b. Ensure the Council is adequately resourced, gender balanced, and inclusive of directly affected interests (eg youth and migrants from worst impacted nations), c. Be tasked with regular reporting on whether current policies and plans represent “progression” and Ireland’s “highest possible ambition” (Paris Agreement).

Primary Care Centre for Birr This week the HSE turned down the Rectory Field as a location for the proposed Birr Primary Care Centre. For years the HSE have been informing the people of Birr that they are committed to providing a Primary Care Centre in the town and to date nothing has happened. This weeks news has set us back to square one. Tullamore has a Primary care centre, the Primary Care Centre in Banagher is near completion so why is Birr no further on?? We need to show the HSE that the people of Birr and surrounding areas need a Primary care centre and we want the HSE to make this a priority. The HSE have given an assurance that space will be provided for the possible return of our “Out of Hours (MIDOC) “ when the Birr Primary Care Centre is built. The longer the delay the longer the wait to get our MIDOC back to BIRR. We are also asking for an “X-RAY Diagnostic Hub” in the new PCC. It is amazing how many cars travel to Tullamore by day and night for this service. We are fed up of travelling and fed up of waiting weeks to see a doctor. We urge the Minister for Health and the HSE to take immediate action on developing a primary care centre for Birr without further delay.

Any prisoners serving a sentence longer than 8 years are allowed to apply for parole halfway through that sentence. Being approved for parole would grant them early release from prison. Someone sentenced to life in prison can apply after 7 years. The parole board is an administrative collection of members who advise the minister for Justice and Equality on the applications from long term prisoners. The members include senior officials from the department of justice and equality, the head of the probation service, the medical director of the central mental hospital and various community representatives. At the moment the applicant must go before a parole board who will assess their progress and examine how they have engaged in reformative work while in prison and a number of other factors including; * Whether it is reasonable to grant early release based on the nature of the offence * Whether they want release * Whether there are any compassionate grounds that would grant special consideration * Whether they have engaged with therapeutic services within prison to combat their offending behaviour * And whether their release would be considered a threat to the safety of the community Their recommendation is passed to the serving minister for justice and equality who must then either accept, deny or accept it in part. When a prisoner is not recommended for release, they will have their case reviewed every one and a half to three years. This means that the families of victims must prepare themselves to write a statement each time between the seven-year mark and when the perpetrator is eventually released on license. This is a traumatising task for those bereaved by homicide or victims of crime. A piece of legislation that would increase the minimum term served before convicted killers could apply for parole to 12 years was first proposed to the government in 2016. It was enacted in July 2019 and would mean that the parole board would become an independent body outside of the government becoming more transparent and accessible for victims. The new parole board would be made up of people who are appointed by the Minister for Justice who would have an understanding of the prison system, the law and the impact on victims. This would remove politics from the parole process. The Parole Act was passed in 2019 and a year later it has still not been implemented. Convicted murders have been eligible for parole during this time, the Act would have been retrospective and ensured they had to serve a minimum of 12 years so the Department of Justice has let down victims and their families with the delay. Sinead O'Leary was the victim of a random, vicious knife attack which left her fighting for her life, and ended the life of her best friend Nichola Sweeney. Her attacker, Nichola's murderer, Peter Whelan, has been up before the Parole board numerous times, he has also been granted day release and neutral venue visits in the area where he committed the horrific assault. The Parole process has left Sinead feeling re-traumatised and disposable, and it has devastated Nichola Sweeney's family. . Here is Sinead's account; "The process has been soul destroying, painful and confronting. Peter Whelan deemed my life to be without worth, he deemed Nichola’s life to be without worth and he continues to do so. Allowing this monstrous individual to have access to the Parole Board 7 years before he was due to even begin serving his sentence for her murder devalues Nichola’s life. Recommending and permitting temporary day releases after serving a mere four years, not even the minimum seven-year term of this sentence, devalues Nichola’s life and Nicholas families trauma.. Reducing the sentence of attempted murder by four years devalues my trauma. Whelan may display ‘good behaviour’ in prison but Whelan has done this before. He reportedly was a ‘model client’ during a 4-month stay in a substance abuse treatment centre which his parents enrolled him days after he assaulted the girls on New Year’s Eve, yet two weeks later he launched his frenzied attack on Nichola and I. To be blunt, prison is not the real world. It is simply controlled compliance. Compliance should not be rewarded, it should be expected. What happens to someone as disordered as Whelan when all the strict controls of prison are replaced with the myriad of choices, stresses, and temptations of the real world? I was 19 years of age when Peter Whelan tried to kill me. I was at the beginning of my adult life, no longer a child, with a world of possibilities ahead of me. Instead, I entered adulthood in a world of pain and trauma. I spent my 20th birthday recovering in a hospital bed reeling from the reality that my best friend had been murdered. While the man who tried to kill me slept soundly in his cell despite the horror he inflicted upon Nichola and I. I have spent subsequent birthdays mourning the life of my best friend and the life that was taken from me. For I am serving my own life sentence because of the actions of Peter Whelan. In 2019, I was told that not only had Whelan had three meetings with the Parole Board, in 2010, 2014 and 2018, but that he had been recommended for three-monthly neutral venue visits with family in Cork. And to my shock and disbelief, he had actually been in Cork based on this decision several times. This information was absolutely devastating to Nichola's family and I. We were completely blindsided. The position I have been put in is not right and not just. My life is not is not liveable with Whelan returning to my community, to Cork, in any capacity. I feel I must advocate for not only myself and my right to a peaceful and safe life, but for my family and for the wider community to have peaceful and safe lives from this dangerous unremorseful individual. And of course I feel I must advocate for Nichola and her family's ongoing trauma."

International students have not been adequately considered in Ireland’s COVID-19 response: - Due to closed immigration offices, some have remained stuck in Ireland for months, with unanswered emails and calls to INIS and university immigration offices (1). - In Dublin, an online renewal system that requires applicants to mail in their passports has resulted in passports lost in the mail or held up to 3 months (2). - Despite permission extensions, a valid up-to-date residence card is required to allow most non-EU international students to exit and reenter the country (1). These delays have meant that they haven’t been able to return home to care for sick family members or say goodbye to dying loved ones for fear of not being allowed to return. Heartbreaking stories of isolation, frustration, and loss currently fill the international student community. In addition, the recent ruling by the Court of Appeals (3), classifying international students who reside in Ireland for more than one year as “Ordinary Residents,” has put considerable financial burden on international students. Despite bringing in some 400 million euros to the Irish economy (4), international students are already required to pay 300 euros per year out of pocket for residency cards that must be renewed yearly. This ruling now additionally requires international students to purchase health insurance for immigration purposes costing 600+ euros per year (3, 5-7). It is illogical and excessive to classify students as Ordinary Residents and expect a yearly renewal fee - especially when students (Stamp 2) can't avail of social service benefits. Allowing international students, already dealing with family separation and heavy financial burden (1, 2, 8), to carry these burdens alone during a pandemic is unreasonable and inhumane. Irish Universities and Colleges – and the Irish Government - have a responsibility to support the students they recruit (9). We, the international students of Ireland, in conjunction with our allies, call on Helen McEntee (Department of Justice), Norma Foley (Department of Education), Simmon Harris (Department of Further Education, Research, Innovation, and Science), and Stephen Donnelly (Department of Health) to: 1.) Resolve the immigration appointment and application backlogs This could be accomplished through the implementation of a fast, secure, country-wide, fully-online renewal process. To avoid passports being lost or held for excessive periods of time, this could be accomplished via a “sticker system,” whereby applicants submit their details online and are issued a “sticker” in the mail that makes their permit valid until the COVID crisis is over. In addition to the online “sticker system,” issuing residence permits for non-EU students that last for the duration of a student’s study, as done in the United States and the Netherlands (for example), would help improve the situation; additionally, removing the yearly renewal process would help with the immigration appointment backlogs. As non-EU students are already under an obligation to report and change in details, and can only work 20 hours per week and thus would be unable to support themselves financially in Ireland’s high cost of living, there is little risk of these students using their residency cards to stay in Ireland under false pretenses. In addition, these issues have been addressed through simple mechanisms already done in other EU countries. 2.) Re-classify international students to avoid unreasonable healthcare costs Under no circumstances should students be forced to pay healthcare costs of 600+ euros following the Court of Appeal ruling (3). We therefore request that international students be declassified as Ordinary Residents. 3.) Consider international students when making policy decisions Take care to consider issues concerning international students when making future decisions regarding residency, visas, GNIB, health, housing, and the overall COVID response, to prevent further issues from arising. Sources: 1. Kenny, Aíne. “We are “cash cows” for the Irish university system, say international students.” Irish Examiner, 27 Oct 2020. 2. Surve, Aakanksha. “Ireland COVID-19 lockdown: An overwhelmed immigration system leaves hundreds in limbo,” DublinLive, 25 Oct 2020. 3. Tottenham BL, Mark. “Students in the State for over one year were “ordinary resident” for the purposes of medical insurance.” Decisis Law Report, 31 Oct 2020. 4. O’Brien, Carl. “Universities eye more Irish students to replace overseas losses” Irish Times, May 3 2020. 5. Curran, Ian. “I’m not sure my friends can afford it”: International students face hike in insurance costs.” theJournal.ie, 10 Oct 2020. 6 .Brady, Niall. “Why a Court of Appeal could cost Irish universities.” The Times, 12 April 2020. 7. Brady, Niall. “Higher education minister Simon Harris urged to prevent health cover hike for foreign students,” The Times, Sept 27 2020. 8. O'Connell, Pet. “Overseas students “isolated and homesick” under lockdown, say Cork campaigner.” Irish Examiner, Oct 22, 2020. 9. “Provision of Education to International Students: Code of Practice and Guidelines for Irish Higher Education Institutions.” Irish Higher Education Quality Network, 2018.

There is a great deal of concern from parents, teachers, principals and elected members of the Northern Ireland Assembly about the current private system of transfer tests and particularly during this pandemic year.

For years Phoenix Park has been providing a place for exercise and fresh air but has never been fully utilised during the winter months due to poor lighting.In these winter months, people have a right to use and feel safe in their parks. This is especially important during Covid restrictions when indoor facilities are closed.  Many of us have other responsbilities such as work, caring, school etc during day light hours. The lack of lighting in the park means people feel unsafe going to get the exercise needed for our mental and physical health. We want the OPW to enable the public make use of the park, even during dark evenings. Additional lighting could be installed for limited periods along the main road, helping people stroll, walk or run safely throughout the winter months.

Immigrants spouses are being treated and marked as herds by giving them stamp 3/1g, making it impossible for them to access the job market. What are the spouses being punished for?? It is causing mental and health deterioration for the skilled immigrants who are suffering financially by being dependent on spouses. Isolation during covid-19 is building up some serious mental concerns as depression and suicidal thoughts. Furthermore adding to the misery of immigrants, stamp 1g is given to the graduates on job search and spouses of CSEP holders and hosting agreement holders. Recruiters are not willing to entertain anyone on Stamp 1g or stamp 3. Now with many of them listing an eligibility criteria as EU/Stamp 4 holder only may apply. Immigrants' spouses who have stamp 1g or stamp 3 are as if they are handcuffed for a crime which is simply being a dependent to a permit holder or critical skill worker. Dependent immigrants want to work and equally contribute to the society and pay taxes.

It is vital that tran* and intersex people are not subject to abuse and harassment. Twitter should be a safe and supportive platform for all to use. At present, abuse is poorly moderated, with abusive accounts running rampant. Reports are not adequately handled and in the rare occasions reports are taken seriously, banned accounts return using VPNs. Rules around restricting permissions of new accounts for a period of a month when they are first created would deter abusers. All in all, action is needed to make Twitter safe for all and to rid it of toxicity.