 |
| All 3 cases were dismissed by the High Court after the applicants dropped their bids to stay in HK |
Three Filipinas with pending applications for non-refoulement, or against being sent home, have separately indicated to the High Court that they wanted to drop their claims as they just wanted to go back home to the Philippines.
They manifested their intention in the wake of
Immigration’s intensified campaign to cut short legal challenges made by
non-refoulement or torture claimants and deport those who have already failed
in their initial bids to stay, or committed crimes in the process.
The latest to express their desire to give up their
claims were M. Sotingco and her minor
son, H., as well as another applicant, M.G. Bautista, whose separate bids to
fight off repatriation were were formally dismissed by the High Court
yesterday, May 31.
 |
| PINDUTIN PARA SA DETALYE! |
A day earlier, R. A. Jemenez, failed in her bid to file
out of time a judicial review of the decision by the Immigration Director and
the Torture Claims Adjudication Board denying her application for
non-refoulement. Part of the reason cited by the High Court was a letter she
sent, saying she wanted to return to the Philippines.
In the case of the Sotingcos, their bid to challenge
the decision of both the Director and the TCAB denying their application to remain
in Hong Kong was made within the prescribed period on Mar 25, 2019.
But on Feb. 17 this year, the mother applied to
withdraw the application for both herself and her son, saying it was already
safe for them to return home, and they wanted to leave as soon as possible.
 |
| PAPAANO SUMALI? PINDUTIN ITO! |
In Bautista’s case, it took the court nearly four
years since she relayed her decision to just return home after her file was
misplaced.
Bautista sought leave on May 2, 2019 for a review of
the TCAB’s decision rejecting her application against repatriation. By Sept. 2,
2019, she told the court she wanted to cancel her application for judicial
review because she wanted to return home.
As her case had already been listed down for
hearing, the court did not allow her to withdraw her application. However, her
case file went missing and was found only recently. The court recently consulted
her and after she affirmed her decision to go home, her application was
formally rejected.
 |
| PINDUTIN PARA SA DETALYE |
The
only case that was considered in full was that of Jemenez, a 55-year-old former
domestic helper from Davao del Sur who was terminated on Aug 17, 2019 and
instead of returning to the Philippines, overstayed her visa.
She was arrested by the police on Mar 22, 2020, but
after her case was referred to Immigration for investigation, filed a
non-refoulement claim, saying her former boyfriend would harm or kill her over
a monetary dispute.
On Oct 21, 2020 the Director rejected her claim,
saying there was not enough evidence to show that she faced a real threat from
her boyfriend and that in any case, the Philippines was big enough for her to
go and live far away from anyone who could harm her.
 |
| BOOK YOUR FLIGHTS NOW! PRESS FOR DETAILS |
On Mar 16, 2022 the TCAB affirmed the Director’s
decision, saying there were inconsistencies and discrepancies in the applicant’s
evidence. Besides, even if there was truly a threat on her life, state or
police protection was available to her on her return to the Philippines.
She filed a late bid for a judicial review of the
Director and TCAB’s decisions on Aug 18, 2022, or two months beyond the
deadline.
In dismissing her claim, High Court Registrar
Christine Chung said she found no error in law or procedural unfairness in the
decisions which Jemenez had tried to challenge.
 |
| BASAHIN DITO |
Further citing the applicant’s written request to
withdraw her application as her problem back home had been resolved, the court
dismissed the leave application.
 |
| PADALA NA! |
 |
 |
| CALL US! |
