Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I did not think it would be a responsibility of the Minister for Defence to defend these sham marriages.

Michael Kennedy (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sure the Minister will give an appropriate reply.

Seán Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I read recently that a Latvian NGO that offers support to victims of human trafficking claims there has seen an avalanche of sham marriages during the past year. It also claims that Ireland and Cyprus are the two countries where Latvian sham marriages are most common. I am fully aware this is not an easy problem with which to deal given the State must meet its responsibilities under EU law to guarantee free movement to the spouses of EU citizens and is also prevented from undertaking systematic checks of particular nationalities.

The reality is that the EU directive on free movement is being exploited. Since the directive became law in 2006 the number of people in Ireland applying for residency rights, based on marriage to an EU citizen, has increased from 1,206 in 2006 to 2,129 in 2009. Every effort must be made to try to prevent these sham marriages taking place. It will take an EU-wide approach to achieve this. My colleague, Deputy Naughten, has sought to have the Civil Partnership and Certain Rights and Obligations of Cohabitants Act 2010 amended to give registrars more power to interview prospective brides and grooms and to block any marriages they deem to be shams. This is a reasonable amendment which should be made immediately. The law needs to be changed to give registrars, the people performing these ceremonies, the powers to block until they are satisfied, through various checks, that a genuine marriage is taking place.

Many developed countries have introduced tough laws making it a criminal offence to enter into a sham marriage in order to circumvent immigration laws. In this regard, the US law imposes a prison sentence of up to five years and a fine of up to $250,000. I will give an example of the tragedy of these marriages. An article I read in relation to the Shelter Safe House, an NGO looking after Latvian women following their return to Latvia, gave an example of an 18 year old woman who was promised a job in a shop in Ireland by a friend living in Ireland who had an Indian boyfriend. When she arrived in Dublin she was allowed to stay in their house but no job materialised. After some time, her friend's boyfriend told her she had to marry his friend to pay him back for board and lodgings. She was put under a lot of pressure and because she had no one to turn to in a foreign country she agreed. She has since returned to Latvia where she has found a boyfriend she loves and is pregnant.

She wants to marry him but cannot do so because she is already married. This girl is 18 years old and she was conned into a marriage here. I am ashamed that this type of thing is happening in Ireland, particularly in respect of people of certain nationalities.

As stated previously, an EU-wide approach is required to deal with this extremely serious problem. I ask the Minister to ensure the matter is raised at the next EU Council of Ministers with a view to achieving a common approach. If such an approach is not taken, the institution of marriage, which is protected under the Constitution, will be seriously undermined.

The Latvian authorities recently suggested that Ireland has been dragging its feet and has ignored calls to deal with the abuse, through marriages of the kind to which I refer, of Latvian citizens living here. That is a serious allegation which could have major consequences on our international reputation. It is incomprehensible that a request from any county to eradicate the practice of sham marriages would be ignored. It is essential that this allegation be investigated fully and that the exact nature of what occurred be determined.

Ireland prides itself on being an equitable nation. Any suggestion that sham marriages were either not taken seriously or, worse still, ignored would paint us in a damagingly negative light on the world stage. The exploitation by one person of another should never be tolerated in a civilised society. If the Latvian authorities claim their requests to have the abuse of their citizens in Ireland stamped out were ignored, we must discover why.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for allowing me to raise this matter and I sincerely hope the Minister will take on board the serious nature of it.

Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teacht Barrett as ucht an ábhar seo a chur faoi bhráid na Dála agus deis a thabhairt dom freagra a thabhairt ar son an Aire Dlí agus Cirt agus Athchóirithe Dlí.

I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Law Reform and I welcome the opportunity to deal with the issue of marriages of convenience contracted for the purposes of exploiting the terms of the directive on free movement and, in particular, the involvement of Latvian citizens. This is a matter which has received significant recent publicity but has long been a concern for the Minister and the immigration authorities and their colleagues involved in marriage registration.

Free movement is a fundamental right in the EU. Under EU free movement rules, once an EU citizen exercises his or her entitlement to move to and live in a member state other than that of which he or she is a national, he or she is entitled to be accompanied or joined by his or her non-EEA family members. Crucially, this includes persons whom such people subsequently marry, irrespective of their immigration status.

Prior to the Metock judgment in 2008, Ireland had in place a rule that granted EU treaty rights only to non-EEA family members with prior lawful residence in another EU member state. This provision, had it not been struck down, would have excluded virtually all of the types of cases currently being highlighted from benefiting under the directive.

The Minister is surprised by the contention that Ireland has been passive on this issue. This is not the message we are getting from the Latvian authorities. The latter have expressed their appreciation of the measures the State is taking and there has been considerable operational co-operation between the Garda National Immigration Bureau and its colleagues in the Latvian police force.

Far from being passive, no member state has been as active as Ireland on this matter at Justice and Home Affairs Council meetings. The Minister has personally raised the issue at the highest level at EU meetings on a number of occasions as far back as September 2008, within weeks of the judgment being handed down. He has raised his concerns at successive EU Presidency meetings of JHA Ministers in the intervening period. However, the Minister received little support at the time from his colleagues from other member states. The Department has had ongoing concerns since the Metock case precisely because it could see the huge potential for abuse of the directive and the extent to which the ruling effectively set aside immigration control in respect of family members of EU nationals. The Department's experience is that the directive is now regarded by non-EU and EEA persons seeking to circumvent immigration controls as an unrestricted means to regularise their immigration status in the wider EU.

While the European Commission has set out guidelines for dealing with the issue, the balance of advantage is very much with the applicant and the onus of proof lies with the member state. This is why Ireland and some other member states have called for an amendment to the directive to restore the pre-Metock position. Ireland remains strongly of the opinion that amendments to the directive are necessary and that the it should remain under continuing review at the Council of Ministers. We continue to seek the support of other member states, including those whose citizens are involved in suspect marriages. However, the difficulty of achieving such amendments must be acknowledged. The Department will continue to highlight this issue at every opportunity, including directly with the Commission when it visits Ireland later this year to assess our implementation of the directive.

Marriages of convenience are, of their nature, difficult to detect. Final determination as to the validity of marriage-based claims in this area can be made only after an in-depth examination of the particular circumstances of each individual case. The directive prohibits systematic checks.

On the domestic front, both the Department and An Garda Síochána have been taking steps to address this issue. I congratulate the Garda on the ongoing success of Operation Charity. This operation, which was launched by the Garda National Immigration Bureau in November 2009, has so far prevented 80 marriages of convenience from taking place through the issuing of objections to registrars to planned marriages which it is suspected may be marriages of convenience. The bureau has also made 16 arrests in this period for alleged offences including bigamy, the production of false documentation and illegal residence in Ireland. There is valuable ongoing co-operation between the bureau and the organised crime enforcement department of Latvia, which is the member state of origin of the majority of EU citizens involved in suspect marriages. There shortly will be a meeting under the auspices of Eurojust in The Hague between the Latvian state police and the Irish authorities to discuss information exchange and co-ordinating investigation activities relating to suspected marriages of convenience.

In the longer term, the Minister will seek to further address the issue through legislation. The Immigration, Residence and Protection Bill 2010, currently before the House, proposes, inter alia, to allow the Minister, in making his determination of any immigration matter, to disregard a particular marriage as a factor bearing on that determination where it is deemed the union is a marriage of convenience. The criminalisation of the contracting of marriages of convenience was considered in the context of the Bill but difficulties are presented by the strong constitutional protection for marriage in Ireland and the issue of enforcement.

The Minister particularly welcomes the updated guidelines for registrars for marriage notifications, which issued to all superintendent registrars in Ireland on 2 September. These new guidelines include stricter conditions on proof of identity which will require applicants for marriage to provide letters of authentication of birth certificates from their embassies. This requirement will, in most cases, bring the proposed marriage to the notice of the authorities of the member state of the EU citizen in question and afford them an opportunity to outline the risks involved. The Minister is of the view that this measure alone could have a significant impact on the number of suspect marriages. This is also the view of the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, with which the Irish authorities have been in contact through our embassy in Riga. As recently as last week, the Latvian Ministry thanked the relevant authorities here for the steps being taken to tackle this abuse and pledged their continuing co-operation with both the Minister's Department and the Garda to end the exploitation which is at the root of this matter. The Minister has also instructed his officials to examine afresh the processes in place in the Department for approval and assessment of these applications. Arising from that review, other steps may well need to be taken to tighten up the procedures.

There is no quick fix solution to this problem. A combination of actions, including prevention, ensuring that marriages of convenience are disregarded in immigration decisions and police co-operation, will be required. Ultimately, the Minister believes there is a need for legislative action at EU level.