An individual who was granted asylum in Ireland following his escape from the Taliban has received €10,000 in recompense for a case that a tribunal categorised as “overt racism”. The individual had been apprehensive about being deported back to Afghanistan when, amid a row over tenancy, his landlord sent him a text regarding the inspection of his “papers”.
His landlord, Aidan Corless, expressed regret for the text at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) and confessed that it was sent during a moment of annoyance, adding that he wasn’t proud of his words. The tribunal was presented with evidence confirming that the landlord wasn’t aware that the tenant had a family of six staying in the two-bedroom residence.
The WRC has instructed Mr Corless to give €10,000 in remuneration to Irfanullah Refah under the legislation of the Equal Status Act 2000. Stewart Reddin, from the Dublin South Citizens Information Service, who represented Mr Refah at the tribunal, testified that Mr Refah had served as a manager for a non-profit organisation implementing rural development schemes in southern Afghanistan, including campaigns to persuade young girls to attend school.
Additionally, Mr Reddin mentioned that Mr Refah had to abscond when the Taliban staged a hostile takeover in 2017 due to his role with US military forces. In 2017, he arrived in Ireland, was provided asylum the next year and later was permitted by the justice minister to bring his family to Ireland.
More than a year into Mr Refah’s lease, a disagreement developed between the landlord and tenant. Mr Refah sent texts in July of the previous year demanding that issues such as broken heaters, the need for window and door repairs, and a fallen bathroom ceiling be addressed. The landlord, in response, accused Mr Refah of unlawfully residing in the estate on July 24th and warned him that he ought to be deported instead of attempting to claim benefits.
The court listened to Mr. Refah’s fear that he could potentially be reported to the authorities and deported back to Afghanistan where he fears for his life. Mr. Corless presented his view that Mr. Refah had been unlawfully residing in the flat for two years, asserting he would not have leased a two-bedroom flat to a six-member family.
It was conveyed to the court that initially, Mr. Refah had been paying the flat’s rent in cash to his friend, Qamar Ali. Though Mr. Reddin argued that his client obtained a lease agreement, with both his and Mr. Ali’s names on it, on 27th February 2022, Mr. Corless countered by saying that Mr. Ali was the exclusive tenant.
Mr. Ali stated that Mr. Corless was unaware of Mr. Refah’s six family members residing in the flat, leading to his frustration upon the discovery. He admitted failing to inform Mr. Corless about Mr. Refah’s family, considering it a letdown.
When Mr. Refah filed Equal Status Act notification papers last September, Mr Corless once again claimed that he was unlawfully occupying the flat, as argued by Mr. Reddin. The suggestion was made that Mr. Refah may also be living in Ireland unlawfully with his family, based on this occupancy.
Mr. Reddin presented a decision from the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) released this May concerning the flat located on Bridgefoot Street in Dublin 8. The decision found no independent validation of Mr. Corless’s belief that Mr. Refah had no legal interest in the lease. It was noted that Mr. Refah had agreed to the landlord’s terms, started living in the flat, and was paying rent.
Under Mr. Reddin’s cross-questioning, the landlord confessed that while his remarks may have come across as unpleasant, they were not intended to be discriminatory. In fact, he would have uttered different words to an Irish person under the same circumstances.
Marie Flynn, the WRC adjudicator, upheld Mr. Refah’s complaint. She affirmed that the text message sent by Mr Corless unmistakably referred to Mr. Refah’s immigrant status, implying a negative stereotype of immigrants coming to Ireland without the necessary authorization in pursuit of benefits.
“The defendant seems to be exploiting the disparity between his familiarity with Irish social customs, and the complainant’s foreign origins to upset, scare, and threaten the complainant,” she penned. “Regardless of the defendant’s regret shown at the adjudication meeting or his feelings of annoyance, they do not mitigate the harmful consequences of his racist WhatsApp message to the complainant.”