Man challenges loss of jobseeker pay following TV broadcast

A man who featured in an RTÉ TV programme about prostitution has challenged a decision to cut off his jobseeker’s allowance.

Ioan Anton was filmed in a Primetime Investigates broadcast in February 2012. He claims his appearance in that was "entirely innocent" but the programme had insinuated he was involved in prostitution and brothel-keeping, which he denies.

He said he was shown driving several people who appeared in the programme and, following the broadcast, Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton made a decision on January 24th last to stop paying him the allowance.

In his High Court proceedings against the Minister, he claims her decision is “fundamentally flawed”.

The court heard, after the broadcast, that Mr Anton, a native of Romania, was informed by an inspector with the department that his €372 jobseeker’s allowance payment was under review.

In March 2012, he was interviewed by officials of the department and the Revenue arising from his appearance in the programme, he said. He said he brought documents as requested to that interview and denied being involved in a business for which he was receiving money. He was subsequently informed his jobseeker’s allowance was being stopped over failure to disclose his means, he said. Mr Anton said he appealed, engaged lawyers and complied with every request for disclosure about his means.

His appeal was to include an oral hearing and he was told last August it had been listed for hearing, he said. Last January, he was told it was being disallowed and the payment of the allowance stopped last March.

Mr Anton, Hamlet Lane, Balbriggan, Co Dublin, who has lived in Ireland since 1998, claims the decision not to grant him an oral hearing and disallow his appeal breaches fair procedures. He also claimed the decision to cutoff his allowance appeared to have been on unspecified evidence of which he was not made aware.

In an affidavit, Mr Anton said the cutting off of his allowance has caused him and his family “hardship and distress” and he had had to borrow from relatives. He was not involved in prostitution and brothel keeping and his appearance in the TV broadcast was “entirely innocent”.

He said a BMW car driven by him in the broadcast did not belong to him but to a female friend who has since left the country. He had sold that car, which he said he had the use of for a short time, and sent on the proceeds to his friend, he said.

Permission to bring the challenge was granted on an ex-parte basis (one side only represented) by Mr Justice Michael Peart, who returned the matter to June.