Deportation Of Indian

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31111, 14 July 1966, Page 14

Deportation Of Indian

Sir, —On marrying, and before any deportation order was made out against him, Mr Persad did seek legal advice to help him to remain in this country. An order was made in May for his deportation within two months. Arrangements were made for an appeal. Because of the futility of such an appeal, it was never lodged. But the young couple were left with the assurance that an appeal was pending and the deportation order would not be enforced until it was heard. Owing to a police oversight, Mr Persad was taken at only 30 minutes’ notice and so left the country without a chance to speak to his wife. We are still hoping that, with the grace of God and the compassion of those in authority, this young couple may soon be reunited —Yours, etc., MOTHER. July 13, 1966.

Sir, —In reply to "Justice,” one might ask what law it is that keeps man and wife apart in these cases. The agony of mind and soul resulting to both parties is surely of some consequence. What brand of civilisation or discrimination allows this disruption to family life to continue, with resulting hardship to both parties? Something above and beyond the present law is needed to bring about a solution of the problem. No-one can say it is right for the present situation to continue. The rights and feelings of our New Zealand nationals in these cases deserve greater consideration than is now being given by the powers that be.—Yours, etc., STUDENT. July 13, 1966.

Sir, —Who can deny that for love, two people can face all obstacles not always blindly? Does “Justice” think loved ones did not want to help? They did, as soon as possible. But the law had not heard any of the facts for his defence. Mr Persad, relying on the law for a hearing, was suddenly snatched from his work. He did not know till 30 minutes before his departure that the not-fully-organis ed plea had been turned down. Is that justice?—Yours, etc., MR JUSTICE. July 13, 1966.