Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

50. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade further to Parliamentary Question No. 41 of 23 November 2016, if he is satisfied that the migration compacts currently being negotiated at EU level do not violate Ireland's international obligations of non-refoulement; his views on whether all the countries involved are safe and suitable for meeting the needs of those escaping conflict and violence; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3042/17]

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The principle of non-refoulement in international law forbids the rendering of a victim of persecution to his or her persecutor. Generally, the persecutor in question is a state actor. According to Article 33.1 of the 1951 UN Convention and Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees "No Contracting State shall expel or return ("refouler") a refugee in any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion." In the past year, the EU has concluded deportation deals with Turkey and Afghanistan and is thrashing out further migration compacts with Nigeria, Niger, Mali, Ethiopia and Senegal and there is talk of deals with Lebanon and Jordan. These deals have been criticised by human rights groups for commodifying refugees and allowing their protection to be outsourced to countries ill-equipped to protect them. Is the Minister happy that all the countries involved are safe and suitable for meeting the needs of those escaping conflict and violence?

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The European Commission set out a new results-oriented concept of co-operation with third countries on 7 June 2016, known as the migration partnership framework. Draft migration compacts were drawn up for the first five priority countries identified: Niger, Nigeria, Mali, Senegal and Ethiopia.

The objective of these migration compacts is to: improve co-operation on readmission and return of those not entitled to reside in the EU; prevent irregular migration and counter smuggling and trafficking in human beings; reinforce the current international protection system for refugees in the partner countries; and, crucially, address the root causes of irregular migration. Ireland has consistently been very clear in all discussions on the EU's response to the migration crisis that addressing these root causes is essential and that the actions which the EU takes, using instruments which are funded primarily from development budgets, must be used for development and humanitarian activities.

Discussions within the EU and with the priority countries as outlined are continuing, and a progress report was presented by the European Commission to the European Parliament, European Council and the Foreign Affairs Council in December 2016. The progress report details the co-operation to date with the five priority countries, and sets out the early results, notably reduced irregular migration and increasing returns. Despite making some headway, notably in Niger, progress on the partnership framework will require time and commitment to achieve significant results.

Ireland supports migration compacts as a key instrument to stem irregular migration and prevent human trafficking and will continue to engage positively in the process. We are in particular involved in work on that with Ethiopia, one of Irish Aid's key partner countries.

Human rights and humanitarian values are at the core of the EU and member states' approach under the partnership framework. The EU and its member states are committed to enhancing human rights safeguards in all negotiations on migration and mobility and to ensuring co-operation frameworks with third countries are built on these principles.

Issues relating to non-refoulement are, in the first instance, a matter for my colleague the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality. I am advised that the partnership framework approach does not impact upon Ireland's legal framework or procedures in respect of the deportation of persons from the State, including with regard to the principle of non-refoulement. Before any decision is made to deport an applicant, the Tánaiste and Minister for Justice and Equality has to be satisfied that the applications made by the person concerned for asylum, for temporary leave to remain in the State and for subsidiary protection, together with all refoulement issues, were fairly and comprehensively examined.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In response to my parliamentary question in November, the Minister said he was happy with the provisions in the EU-Afghanistan joint way forward on migration. He seemed satisfied that vulnerable refugees would be protected there upon deportation. However, the Department of Foreign Affairs travel advice for Afghanistan has the instruction "do not travel". Therefore, Irish citizens should under no circumstances go to Afghanistan because it is not deemed safe enough for us, but we are happy to deport refugees there, including women and children.

In his response, the Minister also referred to the fact that this deal is not a formal agreement and therefore creates no rights or obligations under international law. This informal deal drastically affects the lives of up to 80,000 of the world's most vulnerable people. It is unclear where they will stand as regards their rights under international law. The EU's shift from value-based diplomacy to bargain diplomacy is worrying. It is well known that in exchange for accepting deported refugees, Afghanistan will benefit from increased financial aid from the EU. We met Afghans in Calais and none of them wanted to go back because they left for fear of their lives. Going back was not an option for them. How in God's name can the EU send people back to a country they left in fear for their lives?

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Negotiations are ongoing on the migration compacts, as agreed through the EU and partner countries. They should certainly be supported. Operational results have most notably been demonstrated, for example, in areas like Niger in Africa. The number of migrants crossing the Sahara via Niger has been reduced from a high of 70,000 in 2015 to a low of 1,500 in November 2016. In addition, over 100 smugglers involved in human trafficking have been prosecuted. Support from the EU has been critical in this regard.

I agree with the Deputy that the situation in Afghanistan is extremely challenging and difficult. It remains an area for which our travel advice is such that citizens should not travel there in normal circumstances. Discussions on the compacts are continuing between the EU and partner countries. When these are shown to be successful I am sure that further countries will be chosen. The House can be assured that Ireland will remain actively engaged in the process.

Mick Wallace (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are talking about a negotiated arrangement with the country of origin. However, leaked memos have shown that the EU suggested stripping Afghanistan of aid if the government did not co-operate, and all the while acknowledging that the security situation in the country is getting worse. In a country that relies so heavily on foreign aid and where domestic revenue makes up just 10.4% of GDP, the benefactor holds all the power in deals like this. According to Dr. Liza Schuster, a migration expert based in Kabul, the Afghan deal is an example of how developed countries are able to push through their agendas in countries where there simply is not the capacity in ministries to push back.

Currently, more than 9 million people are in need of humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. According to the UN, hunger is a particularly grave issue affecting 1.8 million malnourished people of which 1.3 million are children aged under five. This is aside from the fact that the majority of those who left and do not want to return went due to the Taliban or ISIS. Some were threatened because they worked for the US military over there.

The Minister may say we are negotiating with the Afghan Government, but I still do not understand because it is not an open process in that sense. It is not fair to send them back there.

Declan Breathnach (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Our time has elapsed, Minister.

Charles Flanagan (Laois, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will drop a note to the Deputy on the point he has raised. I also wanted to refer to Calais which was mentioned by him previously, so I will drop him a note on that as well.