THE FATHER OF double murderer Yousef Palani has been granted permission by the High Court to proceed with his action against the State’s decision to stop his social welfare benefits after finding that there are “reasonable grounds to infer” he engaged in criminal activity.

Juma Palani has argued that there is no evidence to support such an assertion.

Mr Palani, who has an address in Sligo, is taking action against the Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB), the Chief Appeals Officer, the Minister for Social Protection, the Minister for Justice, Ireland and the Attorney General.

Yousef Palani, who was driven by his hatred of gay men and decapitated one of his victims in his own home, was jailed for life last year for the murders of Michael Snee and Aidan Moffitt and for stabbing Anthony Burke in the eye with a kitchen knife, all of which happened over a four-day period in Sligo.

The remains of Mr Moffitt (42) were discovered in his home on 11 April, 2022, while the body of Michael Snee (58) was found the next day, also at his home.

Iraq-born Yousef Palani, who was 23 at the time of his sentencing, had asked his victims if they were “100 percent Irish” and told detectives that he would have continued “to kill” if gardaí had not stopped him.

The Central Criminal Court was told that Yousef Palani was born in Iraq and came to Ireland aged six, while both his parents are of Kurdish ethnicity and had received Irish citizenship in 2021.

Juma Palani is seeking an order quashing decisions made earlier this year “disallowing” his claims for jobseeker’s and disability allowance and seeking repayment of monies paid out under the the schemes.

He is also seeking a declaration that the State “erred in law and fact and/or exercised their discretion improperly and in excess of their jurisdiction in determining, pursuant to the Criminal Assets Bureau Act 1996, that there are reasonable grounds to infer that the applicant engaged in criminal activity”.

Mr Palani submits in his application that no evidence supporting that assertion has been produced.

Mr Palani is also seeking a declaration that the respondents are in breach of and have failed to vindicate “the applicant’s procedural rights under the Constitution and the European Court of Human Rights Act”.

In February, the applicant’s solicitor wrote to the relevant State parties requesting “any evidence for concluding that the applicant was engaged in criminal conduct and might engage in threats and intimidation of deciding officers” as defined in the Act.

At the High Court today, Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty granted permission for the review and adjourned the matter to January.